bsilver at chrononomicon.com
Tue Nov 1 12:35:12 PST 2005
On Nov 1, 2005, at 3:21 PM, Peter Matulis wrote:
> --- stan <stanb at panix.com> wrote:
> Yeah, it has a "something's missing" feel to it. I suppose it was
> time to distance ourselves from the demon thing though. It not
> having a face is a step in that direction. The horns remain to
> appease hardcore people I guess.
I could almost buy the arguments for the need of a logo distinct from a
A) Does FreeBSD actually have a marketing department? I was under the
impression it didn't. So how can you have a good argument for needing
a separate logo? Admins trying to "argue for using FreeBSD in a
corporate environment" simply don't include the Beastie images if their
PHBs are that offended by it...
B) I keep getting the feeling that this (logo is not a mascot! We need
to sell to corporates with a serious image!), is more of a way to
justify an underlying motive, and that is people are offended by the
devil imagery and can't separate it from the tongue-in-cheek daemon
If that is the actual reason...it's "offensive" to people who probably
don't even know what a daemon actually is or what the reference came
from...I would prefer not to have any "logo creation". It has a very
oily feel to the whole thing to have people maneuvering to change
something they find religiously offensive under the guise of something
happy and positive for the group. THIS IS WONDERFUL FOR THE PROJECT!
IT HELPS OUR IMAGE AND WE'LL BE MORE POPULAR AND CORPORATIONS WILL LOVE
IT AND IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS "DEVIL" THING even though that's
a totally coincidental bonus that never once occurred to me while
lobbying to change...er, create...a logo...
That said, I personally thought it looked like a nice logo if I was
looking at the right one. It would make a nice glass paperweight to
sell. But...I still don't like what I feel was the real reason for the
But that's just me, I guess.
More information about the freebsd-questions