Re: [GNUnet-developers] website and logo rework

[Schanzenbach, Martin]

To give Amirouche some ideas how it could be improved: 
http://turbomilk.com/blog/cookbook/icon_design/10_mistakes_in_icon_design/
To me, quite a pain point is the text.
Also: 
https://design.tutsplus.com/articles/7-principles-of-effective-icon-design--psd-147

Still, by common human interface design standards (see links in the links) the 
current icon is maybe not ideal, but good.


> On 26. Jan 2018, at 20:45, Schanzenbach, Martin <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On 26. Jan 2018, at 19:31, carlo von lynX <address@hidden> wrote:
>> 
>> Martin, we are the minority of people who accepted
>> the gnu on the web...
> You have anything to back that claim?
> 
>> maybe we want to extend our
>> audience to the people that think that such a home-
>> grown logo doesn't stand for professionality?
> Please put both logos next to each other and reconsider this statement.
> Of course, this is also a matter of taste and I really do not want to argue 
> about this at all... but (hah!):
> The current GNUnet logo is ok. Not great, but ok. It could definitively be 
> improved.
> To to so we would need a professional designer (and I really mean that. 
> Professional. Not as in paid, but in being a professional designer).
> Just as I probably would not want a professional designer to code in GNUnet 
> (unless also a professional coder) I would not want a coder to create the 
> logos. I do not know who created the current logo but considering our limited 
> resources in this regard it is actually quite good.
> 
>> Same
>> goes for the terrible Taler logo? Let Amirouche'
>> creativity go wild, it is going in a totally useful
>> direction!
> Afaik the Taler logo already gets an update (and I really like the new one, 
> hope I am not spoilering things..).
> Just by looking at it I am pretty sure it was done professionally.
> Now, this does not mean that amirouche cannot create the logos. Or anybody 
> else for that matter.
> Feel free. But doing this stuff is not trivial. I envy people who can create 
> beautiful icons/brand logos.
> Who created the Guix logo btw? It looks really nice.
> 
> @Amirouche: Please do not take this the wrong way. Keep up the work and go 
> create ;)
> 
>> 
>> On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 06:46:14PM +0100, t3sserakt wrote:
>>> By the way, is it a stupid idea to let the endpoint of
>>> a cadet path be not the endpoint of user communication,
>>> to protect meta data? Maybe this is easier to accomplish
>>> than onion routing, or an additional protection together
>>> with OR.
>> 
>> That is actually the simple way to implement OR,
>> just make CADET connections between the relays
>> and therefore obfuscate the final endpoints.
>> The reason we don't do that yet is because we
>> don't have a strategy to decide which relays are
>> trustworthy - or maybe, if rps is functional, we
>> now have one.
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> E-mail is public! Talk to me in private using encryption:
>>        http://loupsycedyglgamf.onion/LynX/
>>         irc://loupsycedyglgamf.onion:67/lynX
>>        https://psyced.org:34443/LynX/
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> GNUnet-developers mailing list
>> address@hidden
>> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnunet-developers
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GNUnet-developers mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnunet-developers

signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP