Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [ee4j-community] Jakarta EE logo selection process - next steps

Same as done with name selection: community suggested *tons* of options, WG filtered to a reasonable amount and everyone voted. 

Can't see the issue here.

If the community  (in a broad way) would take every single decision and action, we don't need EF. That's why there's a whole structure under the project.


Cheers,

Em Sex, 23 de mar de 2018 14:30, Mike Milinkovich <mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> escreveu:
On 2018-03-23 4:27 PM, Jason Greene wrote:
I read that differently. My interpretation is: They just eliminated candidates that failed to meet the design criteria, which did include a basic legal component. The next step is a more thorough legal analysis as well as a brand review from the foundation’s marketing team. From that process they will pick the strongest contenders. Both of these functions are pretty standard (Also really important for major industry marks) and based on expertise & analysis, and while we all have some biases, I seriously doubt this is driven by simple personal preferences.

This is correct. We removed the ones that did not meet the design criteria as stated in writing. This included removing the ones that we knew had legal issues. Now we are going to do more reviews, including deeper legal ones.

The community will have an opportunity to select from a number of options.


Is the concern more that there will be too few options and you guys might not like the  options, or is it that there is some nefarious purpose? If it’s the latter what would they have to gain?

On Mar 23, 2018, at 2:21 PM, Richard Monson-Haefel <rmonson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Right. Some were removed for legal reasons but the rest was a subjective decision by the marketing team.

On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 2:17 PM, Markus KARG <markus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I understood the original mail in a way that from all submissions the EF
removed everything but left over only four due to a pre-selection by their
*marketing* team (not *legal* team).

-Markus


-----Original Message-----
From: ee4j-community-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ee4j-community-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Heiko W. Rupp
Sent: Freitag, 23. März 2018 20:07
To: EE4J community discussions
Subject: Re: [ee4j-community] Jakarta EE logo selection process - next steps

On 23 Mar 2018, at 18:35, Markus KARG wrote:

> I second that. The EF should simply remove those logos which are
> legally problematic, and then let the community vote for their
> favorite. This is a community project, and

Isn't that what
| > *   We will hold a community vote to determine which of these
| > final candidate logos should be the chosen logo.

says?

I understand Paul that the EF needs to (to quote you) "remove those logos
which are legally problematic", which is done by the marketing team, as they
know this process of removal best.

But then I may be wrong.
   Heiko

_______________________________________________
ee4j-community mailing list
ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j-community

Back to the top