This topic contains 31 replies, has 19 voices, and was last updated by 
Walkingadventure 9 years, 2 months ago.
-
Posts
-
unfortunately the number responding to the poll is only 9.2% of the “active membership”.
and only 20% of the “active membership” voted in the second round of the logo referendum in the first place.Disclaimer : Always answering to a higher power.
@labrat_wr wrote:
unfortunately the number responding to the poll is only 9.2% of the “active membership”.
and only 20% of the “active membership” voted in the second round of the logo referendum in the first place.Maybe the rest of the membership: a) doesn’t care; b) thinks the issue is silly; c) is unaware of the issue because they aren’t active in the forums.
Is it time for another poll?
The problem with this poll is that it doesn’t give good guidance to the board. Instead of having the choices follow a natural progression of “very positive” to “neutral” to “very negative,” the choices seemed confusing. The final choice started to come closest to my opinion: “I really dislike the new logo. The colors are drab and it communicates nothing about our organization.” But then the poll author added what to me seems a complete about-face at the end: “But I will live with it” which, if selected, could be interpreted as an endorsement of the new logo.
@kbraband wrote:
The problem with this poll is that it doesn’t give good guidance to the board. Instead of having the choices follow a natural progression of “very positive” to “neutral” to “very negative,” the choices seemed confusing. The final choice started to come closest to my opinion: “I really dislike the new logo. The colors are drab and it communicates nothing about our organization.” But then the poll author added what to me seems a complete about-face at the end: “But I will live with it” which, if selected, could be interpreted as an endorsement of the new logo.
Yup, sorry. There was supposed to be one last option that said “I absolutely hate it and want to vote on something professionally designed” That’s why I had the “But I will live with it” on the last one listed. Once I published the poll and saw that the last option didn’t get added, it was too late to do anything about it. Beside that last remark I thought the range was still, in essence, “very positive to very negative” and just let it ride.
I’m not a polster, but I did take stats in college and know this is pretty week poll. However, my intent was not to provide the BOD with direction, but some measure of the reception of the new logo by the “voting” members, since many of the blog statements about it are so polarized.
You’ll never get 100% participation, so you have to use what you do get as a representative slice of the whole. That being the case, these results speak volumes about the luke-warm reception of the new logo. 35% in favor 26% don’t care, 35% not in favor. I’ll say it again – this is not what you’d expect from a strong logo.
If I were running for the board, I would be lobbying for a secondary course of action. To spend another $150 dollars to post the project to 99designs or a similar work-for-contract site just to see what panned out. But I am not running for the board (my wife would be filing papers) and so all I can do is raise awareness. This whole discussion will eventually die, but not before I, as a professional logo designer, have attempted to prove my points about the weakness of this re-branding.
Based on other forum polls in the past, a turnout of 78 votes is pretty substantial. Traditional polling gathering tells you that the most votes are turned in within the first week (sure they will continue to trickle in 1 by 1… ) and it’s been 9 days since this one was published. Time to comment now.
Here’s my spin on the results… take it or leave it.
I love the new logo. I think it is a very strong logo and represents the WGA well. 6% [ 5 ]
5 people out of the entire WGA think the logo “represents the WGA well”. Yeah only 78 have responded but that’s the nature of polls. If the remaining number felt inclined I am sure they’d speak up.
I like the new logo because we needed to update our old one and this is a great improvement 17% [ 14 ]
An additional 14 people like the new logo (but don’t “love” it). What sets this group apart from the other 5 who like it is they don’t see that it “represents the WGA well” -or- they felt strongly about the “we needed to update our old one” statement and didn’t think much about the “represents the WGA well” piece of the other answer.
I’m good with the new logo, it wasn’t my first choice, but I agree with the masses and the BOD. 12% [ 10 ]
Really a “status quo” answer. These 10 people don’t really think its a good choice but don’t really care either way.
I’m impartial to the new logo. I just want the whole affair to be over with. I’m tired of it. 26% [ 21 ]
This one is tricky. It seems like the most impartial way to vote for those fence sitters or those who don’t care about logos at all. However, it probably got many votes because of the 2nd part about wanting the affair to be over with. Either way, this group doesn’t say it likes or dislikes the logo choice. Interestingly this is about a quarter of the respondents. Not really a great result from a logo process. The process should shoot for like it or dislike it and very little “grey area” votes.
I don’t really care for the new logo, but it’s really not a big deal anyway. 11% [ 9 ]
Like the impartial votes, this group really doesn’t care about the logo at all and is expressing their “taste” regarding the logo choice.
I’m not very happy with the new logo, it just doesn’t seem to be much of an improvemnet 10% [ 8 ]
Interestingly, the “strongest” of the no-vote statements.
I really dislike the new logo. The colors are drab and it communicates nothing about our organization. But I will live with it. 14% [ 11 ]
Traditionally these would be worded from most in favor to least in favor. However, this one is again a mixed question. You have the folks who “really dislike” the new logo but they are also voting for “I’ll live with it”.
To be open, I voted for this option but not because I would like to “live with it”. I voted for it because I do think the new logo is “drab” and does nothing to improve over the prior logo, in many ways it takes steps backwards in logo design rather than forwards.
I will “live with it” because that’s how participating in a big political group is (I learned that from being in a PTA as well)
But, I still think the main point here is we don’t have to “live with it” and I think it’s my right to continue to express my opinion on the matter just like any other political group. There are those who sit quietly regarding all topics and there are those who lobby and speak. I never really spoke up at all about the logging temps topic which was the “last heated debate”. However, I do feel that the group can “get it right” here rather than just “settle”. What frustrates me is knowing that some on the current BOD think it could be better and the masses agree it could be better based on this poll. As I have said before, this is not voting for president and we should all be proud of the group we belong to and feel like we have a small say in the direction the group takes. The way this decision was handled, I think many don’t feel like they helped all that much (even though it was put to the masses for voting…) and those same many feel like everyone is just “settling” rather than producing something to be proud of.
As of right now over 30% of those in the WGA speaking on the topic disagree with the Logo choice that was made. 37% are basically impartial on the topic. 12% are “good with the logo choice but it’s not their favorite. 6% love the new logo choice. 17% like it but don’t believe it represents the WGA well.
If I was a member of the newly elected BOD, I would work to convince the board that this decision should be revisited. But I am not so I can only regurgitate numbers and hope that someone else on the newly formed board agrees with me. If not, I guess “I will live with it” and hit the trails.
What is the big friggn deal? It’s a logo for a website that only 78 people care about. Can we just drop the subject?
:sigh:
😆
I, as well as others, have been reading and watching the outcome of this issue.
I wasn’t sure what was different about this Association issue but I finally put my finger on it…
In the past 35 years I have held positions on a variety of committees, sub-committees, and BOD’s. Some were paying jobs, some were charity. Some were by being elected, some by being appointed, some by being railroaded!
In all these groups, our biggest problem was input from the membership. Noone would tell us how they felt about an issue until it was done. Or they told us and we either misunderstood or decided otherwise.
THIS Association is the first I’ve been involved with that the whole membership has the opportunity to communicate an issue at anytime, anyplace, simply by logging on and typing! No annual meeting held strictly for formal business… the business is always in front of us, in the Forums. And I believe that 100% of the Directors read this site.
I trust that if the logo issue needs to be revisited, it will! If it is presented at a BOD meeting, and moved to be revisited, and the motion is discussed and passed, we will know. If the motion fails, we know it will be presented again in the future. Maybe in 3 monthes, maybe in 3 years, but that is up to our elected BOD.
Is the logo issue “beating a dead horse”? Perhaps. But that action has also created member opinions that are invaluable input to the decisions made by the BOD.
Before submitting this, I glanced at the top left-hand corner of the webpage. Looks familiar.
Although I’m not on the BOD, I would like to thank all the members for ANY comments they post. It is always a risk to speak out, in any setting, public or on-line. To have had this kind of mass input in the past would have been a godsend. It is now up to the BOD to use the Forum info as they see fit.
i feel that it was voted on, and done with. there are other more important things to look into.
it reminds me of two children racing each other and the winner get some candy… well, race is over, and the winner is eating his candy… then the loser wants to race again because they didnt like the results…
the candy is gone, and there isnt anymore. next issue.
for all of your mccain supporters out there.. should we do a revote because not “ALL” americans used their right to vote?
Yeah I am beating a dead horse. I’ve found a few extra paddles and I’m using them.
“What is the big friggin deal?”
Here are a couple reasons why I think it’s a “big deal”.
I put an advertisement on each of my own cache pages with a logo to a group I am representing and asking people to “check out”. Personally I would like to feel some pride in that advertisement in how it looks.
Let’s say as a member of our group, I put together a presentation for a seminar or governmental agency or whatever. Chances are, I would want to put our logo on the presentation. I do think I would want to be proud of that logo and what it says about our organization.
And our logo goes on posters, t-shirts, geocoins, and many other items.
Our logo is an important part of our group whether you, who have posted on these forums, beleive it or not.
I beleive that as a group, if we beleive we have “settled” on a logo that does not fit us and we are not really proud to use it to represent us we are simply short-changing ourselves.
And many people say “there are many more important things to work on”… you “think” there are and say it as an argument against revisiting. You give value to one topic over another. Can’t the group and the board discuss and work on several items at once? Our group’s board meets once per year and discusses lots of topics, no?
For those of you posting, “what’s the point” type messages, you can and should ignore my posts. Obviously for you, the logo doesn’t matter. I congratulate you on finding other things to do with your time than reading my posts. But I urge everyone not to downplay my (and other’s) opinions and the topic itself if you “do not care”. Simply look the other way, please.
Like I said, the only one who can choose to recognize my opinion and the numbers in this poll is our BOD.
And to touch on Jim’s (or Linda’s?) point about the message boards and how they help our group… one thing to remember is only vocal people write on message boards. We have a large marjority that won’t even anonymously vote on polls in the forums and certainly won’t post. We have to make sure as a group to get input from this group as well. Yes, the internet is probably helping all sorts of groups to communicate like never before but just like in those town-hall meetings, folks can sit quietly and never raise their hand.
I choose to be vocal when I want to be vocal. That’s the way it works for me. Sometimes I post 100’s of times per week. Other times, I simply read and enjoy the posts. However, every time I post a message to the group I think about what I am saying, the intended audience, and how I say what I say. I do things for a reason, not just to push buttons or make people upset. I respect other’s opinions 100% of the time and use respectful words and tone. Quite often, everyone should think about what they would say to the other people or 1 person in specific if responding directly if they were sitting together in the same room. That’s how I post on message boards.
-cheeto-
But the simple fact is that we voted, and this more or less, is the logo that won.
Al Gore please speak up. 😀
However, when put to a vote, I voted for this design. This design before the brown was added anyway. I doubt I would have voted for this logo with the brown state.
What I’d like to see changed? The brown state part.
Either:
A. Use energy savers “map” design
B. Break up the brown with a compass rose or something, ANYTHING
C. Go back to the green state and lettering.The more I see this design, the less I like it. But if we stick with it, so be it, it’s a fresh look compared to the old logo. I’ll leave it up to the board to decide whether or not we need to take another look at this. Should the board decide to review the decision, I think we need to stay with this design, but spruce it up a bit.
If the board speaks up now and says this is a done deal, then lets move on please.
The point is we did vote and the one we have won. Maybe it was a small margin but the fact is that logo won. Who’s to say the logo you like is the one I like? Nobody will ever be happy with any logo we pick. So why bother?
I just feel this argument is going nowhere. Everybody has to face the facts that we as a group will never agree 100% on anything.
Chris
@Team Vaughan wrote:
The point is we did vote and the one we have won. Maybe it was a small margin but the fact is that logo won. Who’s to say the logo you like is the one I like? Nobody will ever be happy with any logo we pick. So why bother?
I just feel this argument is going nowhere. Everybody has to face the facts that we as a group will never agree 100% on anything.
Chris
The point is that “it’s” not the logo that won. The brown logo is not the winning logo.
I just feel this argument is going nowhere.
Again, between you and I the “argument” may be going nowhere.
Arguing is not the point of my posts, neither is debating amongst people who don’t care about the topic.
Should the board decide to review the decision, I think we need to stay with this design, but spruce it up a bit.
I fully agree with this statement.
I think the voto winning design could have been used as a great starting point as is seen in a couple of other post-new logo anaouncement attempts at sprucing the logo. I absolutely love the one with the navigator stuff on the wisconsin outline.
Again, my posts have nothing to do with “not getting what I wanted”. Quite the contrary if you actually read what I am writing. I am contesting that WE did not get what WE wanted. The poll numbers show that.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.