You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@myfaces.apache.org by Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> on 2006/08/15 01:24:30 UTC
Logo contest
I have a question,
did we allow users to upload as many logos as they want?
I more like the idea of "one user, one shot".
Just my $0.02
--
Matthias Wessendorf
further stuff:
blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
Re: Logo contest
Posted by Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>.
wrong list.
sorry guys
On 8/14/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> I have a question,
>
> did we allow users to upload as many logos as they want?
> I more like the idea of "one user, one shot".
>
> Just my $0.02
>
> --
> Matthias Wessendorf
>
> further stuff:
> blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
>
--
Matthias Wessendorf
further stuff:
blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
Re: Logo contest
Posted by Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>.
ok, was just a question :)
they logos look all great, but I guess only one makes it.
will be very hard!!!
On 8/14/06, Craig McClanahan <cr...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 8/14/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > Forward ...
> >
> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > From: Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>
> > Date: Aug 14, 2006 4:24 PM
> > Subject: Logo contest
> > To: MyFaces Development <de...@myfaces.apache.org>
> >
> >
> > I have a question,
> >
> > did we allow users to upload as many logos as they want?
> > I more like the idea of "one user, one shot".
>
>
> We didn't impose any such restriction, and indeed we've received several
> alternative approaches from several of the submittors ... it would be unfair
> to make them go back and choose only one submission at this point --
> especially as we haven't really given any advice on what our decision
> criteria are going to be :-).
>
> Craig
>
> Just my $0.02
> >
> > --
> > Matthias Wessendorf
> >
> > further stuff:
> > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> >
> >
> > --
> > Matthias Wessendorf
> >
> > further stuff:
> > blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> >
>
>
--
Matthias Wessendorf
further stuff:
blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
Re: Logo contest
Posted by delbd <de...@oma.be>.
My 2 cents:
Have everyone mark the logos they like, that is don't restrict to a top
5 or top 4 or whatever.
Extract from this the top 3 most liked logos. If there is a tie extends
to top 4, top 5 or whatever
Do a second run, where voters can only choose 1 of the 3 remaining logos.
btw, who is going to vote, commiters?
Greg Reddin a écrit :
>
> On Aug 17, 2006, at 2:13 PM, James Mitchell wrote:
>
>> For example (3 votes per person):
>> Craig Sean James Greg Wendy
>> Image 1005 x x x <- tie
>
> ... except I think a better listing would be:
>
> Image 1005 3 binding, 15 non-binding.
> Image 1006 2 binding, 10 non-binding.
> Image 1008 3 binding, 10 non-binding.
>
> ... in which case Image 1005 and 1008 are still tied, but we *might*
> choose one based on non-binding votes or have a runoff.
>
>> You can see how these 2 method differ. Both examples show the same
>> images being voted the same, the difference is in the ranking. I
>> prefer the 2nd method because it more accurately reflects how people
>> feel, rather than just being the common one that most people _didn't_
>> exclude. It's our way of saying "I really REALLY like this one or
>> that one", yet still giving equal voting all around.
>
> I see your point, but I actually like the first method better. This
> is simply because it will be easier for me to choose my top 5 and not
> necessarily pick an order than it will be for me to decide on a single
> one I like best. There are too many that I like a lot to decide which
> one is "best". But I could probably narrow it down to 5 that I like
> enough to vote for.
>
> Either way we go, I'll be surprised if there is actually a tie. What
> are the chances that multiple concepts will actually get the same
> number of votes? But we may get two or more that are very close and
> choose to do a runoff based on that. Or we might see a definite
> preference for one from the non-binding community and choose to have a
> runoff.
>
>>
>> Once the voting is final. This will divide the pool of entries into
>> 2 groups.
>>
>> A) those with a ranking
>> B) those not yet ranked
>>
>> At this point we *should* know who won or tied (requiring a run-off),
>> but until that author provides both the source (Photoshop .psd, or
>> whatever) and files a CLA, they aren't really the winner yet. We
>> should decide on an appropriate time frame to allow people to file
>> this paper work. 1 week? 2 weeks?
>
> I'm cool with the above. It could take much longer than 1 or 2 weeks
> for a CLA to go through if we use the "normal" channels. I think mine
> took about 6 weeks, and recently some have taken even longer. I'm not
> sure the best way in which to handle this.
>
>>
>> In the event that the chosen author cannot or does not file the CLA
>> and provide the image sources, that author will be moved to an
>> unranked status and the next runner-up will be asked to provide the
>> image source and file a CLA. Hopefully, there won't be any issues
>> getting the paperwork filed and such.
>>
>> How does this sound? Does that accurately represent what you guys
>> are thinking?
>
> Close enough :-)
>
> Greg
>
Re: Logo contest
Posted by Greg Reddin <gr...@apache.org>.
On Aug 17, 2006, at 2:13 PM, James Mitchell wrote:
> For example (3 votes per person):
> Craig Sean James Greg Wendy
> Image 1005 x x x <- tie
... except I think a better listing would be:
Image 1005 3 binding, 15 non-binding.
Image 1006 2 binding, 10 non-binding.
Image 1008 3 binding, 10 non-binding.
... in which case Image 1005 and 1008 are still tied, but we *might*
choose one based on non-binding votes or have a runoff.
> You can see how these 2 method differ. Both examples show the same
> images being voted the same, the difference is in the ranking. I
> prefer the 2nd method because it more accurately reflects how
> people feel, rather than just being the common one that most people
> _didn't_ exclude. It's our way of saying "I really REALLY like
> this one or that one", yet still giving equal voting all around.
I see your point, but I actually like the first method better. This
is simply because it will be easier for me to choose my top 5 and not
necessarily pick an order than it will be for me to decide on a
single one I like best. There are too many that I like a lot to
decide which one is "best". But I could probably narrow it down to
5 that I like enough to vote for.
Either way we go, I'll be surprised if there is actually a tie. What
are the chances that multiple concepts will actually get the same
number of votes? But we may get two or more that are very close and
choose to do a runoff based on that. Or we might see a definite
preference for one from the non-binding community and choose to have
a runoff.
>
> Once the voting is final. This will divide the pool of entries
> into 2 groups.
>
> A) those with a ranking
> B) those not yet ranked
>
> At this point we *should* know who won or tied (requiring a run-
> off), but until that author provides both the source
> (Photoshop .psd, or whatever) and files a CLA, they aren't really
> the winner yet. We should decide on an appropriate time frame to
> allow people to file this paper work. 1 week? 2 weeks?
I'm cool with the above. It could take much longer than 1 or 2 weeks
for a CLA to go through if we use the "normal" channels. I think
mine took about 6 weeks, and recently some have taken even longer.
I'm not sure the best way in which to handle this.
>
> In the event that the chosen author cannot or does not file the CLA
> and provide the image sources, that author will be moved to an
> unranked status and the next runner-up will be asked to provide the
> image source and file a CLA. Hopefully, there won't be any issues
> getting the paperwork filed and such.
>
> How does this sound? Does that accurately represent what you guys
> are thinking?
Close enough :-)
Greg
Re: Logo contest
Posted by James Mitchell <jm...@apache.org>.
So, to recap, when the deadline is reached, a vote will be taken for
all the entries. The more entries ranked, the better the outcome, so
it would probably be best to go with a top 10 ranking. The important
point is in how the ranking works.
I think I am hearing 2 different types of voting being suggested.
1. Each voter chooses their favorite n (n can be whatever we decide)
For example (3 votes per person):
Craig Sean James Greg Wendy
Image 1005 x x x <- tie
Image 1006 x x
Image 1007 x
Image 1008 x x x <- tie
Image 1009 x x
Image 1010 x x
Image 1011 x x
This example shows the winner as a tie for Image 1005 and 1008.
2. each voter ranks their top n choices
For example (top 3 ranked):
Craig Sean James Greg Wendy
Image 1005 1 3 2
Image 1006 1 2
Image 1007 3
Image 1008 3 2 1
Image 1009 2
Image 1010 2 1
Image 1011 3 2 3 <- winner
This example ranks each as the following:
Image 1011 8
Image 1008 6
Image 1005 6
Image 1006 3
Image 1007 3
Image 1010 3
Image 1009 2
You can see how these 2 method differ. Both examples show the same
images being voted the same, the difference is in the ranking. I
prefer the 2nd method because it more accurately reflects how people
feel, rather than just being the common one that most people _didn't_
exclude. It's our way of saying "I really REALLY like this one or
that one", yet still giving equal voting all around.
Once the voting is final. This will divide the pool of entries into
2 groups.
A) those with a ranking
B) those not yet ranked
At this point we *should* know who won or tied (requiring a run-off),
but until that author provides both the source (Photoshop .psd, or
whatever) and files a CLA, they aren't really the winner yet. We
should decide on an appropriate time frame to allow people to file
this paper work. 1 week? 2 weeks?
In the event that the chosen author cannot or does not file the CLA
and provide the image sources, that author will be moved to an
unranked status and the next runner-up will be asked to provide the
image source and file a CLA. Hopefully, there won't be any issues
getting the paperwork filed and such.
How does this sound? Does that accurately represent what you guys
are thinking?
--
James Mitchell
678.910.8017
On Aug 17, 2006, at 1:21 PM, Greg Reddin wrote:
> The requirement for a CLA was mentioned at some point. If that is
> a requirement we should probably filter out al entries for which a
> CLA has not been filed. Then we could give each remaining entry a
> number and issue a vote like this:
>
> [ ] 1 (Link)
> [ ] 2 (Link)
>
> Please check your top 5 choices.
>
> From that list we could list the 5 choices with the most votes and
> perhaps make another vote based on that.
>
> As far as community involvement I'd say let's do it the same as
> with releases. Anybody can vote, but the PMC votes are binding.
>
> Greg
>
> On Aug 17, 2006, at 12:06 PM, Sean Schofield wrote:
>
>> I suggest when it comes time to vote we pick our top 5 and rank order
>> them. We can give 5 points to the first choice, 4 points to the
>> second, etc. The top 5 point getters could then be announced and we
>> could vote based on those.
>>
>> I'm assuming the decision will be a committer vote but do we want
>> some
>> public discussion before this vote? Ultimately I think its a
>> personal
>> preference thing and one is unlikely to be persuaded by a group
>> discussion.
>>
>> IMO there are at least 4 or 5 logos that I'm more then happy with.
>> Its just a matter of finding the one that has the broadest appeal.
>>
>> Sean
>>
>> On 8/15/06, James Mitchell <jm...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> I agree. IMHO, limiting this to one entry per person will only
>>> stifle creativeness and may lead to rampant dissociative disorders,
>>> including, but not limited to -- The infamous dakotajack syndrome
>>> (read: multiple personality disorder ;)
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> James Mitchell
>>> 678.910.8017
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Aug 14, 2006, at 7:32 PM, Craig McClanahan wrote:
>>>
>>> > On 8/14/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> Forward ...
>>> >>
>>> >> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> >> From: Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>
>>> >> Date: Aug 14, 2006 4:24 PM
>>> >> Subject: Logo contest
>>> >> To: MyFaces Development <de...@myfaces.apache.org>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> I have a question,
>>> >>
>>> >> did we allow users to upload as many logos as they want?
>>> >> I more like the idea of "one user, one shot".
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > We didn't impose any such restriction, and indeed we've received
>>> > several
>>> > alternative approaches from several of the submittors ... it would
>>> > be unfair
>>> > to make them go back and choose only one submission at this
>>> point --
>>> > especially as we haven't really given any advice on what our
>>> decision
>>> > criteria are going to be :-).
>>> >
>>> > Craig
>>> >
>>> > Just my $0.02
>>> >>
>>> >> --
>>> >> Matthias Wessendorf
>>> >>
>>> >> further stuff:
>>> >> blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
>>> >> mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> --
>>> >> Matthias Wessendorf
>>> >>
>>> >> further stuff:
>>> >> blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
>>> >> mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
>>> >>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: Logo contest
Posted by Greg Reddin <gr...@apache.org>.
The requirement for a CLA was mentioned at some point. If that is a
requirement we should probably filter out al entries for which a CLA
has not been filed. Then we could give each remaining entry a number
and issue a vote like this:
[ ] 1 (Link)
[ ] 2 (Link)
Please check your top 5 choices.
From that list we could list the 5 choices with the most votes and
perhaps make another vote based on that.
As far as community involvement I'd say let's do it the same as with
releases. Anybody can vote, but the PMC votes are binding.
Greg
On Aug 17, 2006, at 12:06 PM, Sean Schofield wrote:
> I suggest when it comes time to vote we pick our top 5 and rank order
> them. We can give 5 points to the first choice, 4 points to the
> second, etc. The top 5 point getters could then be announced and we
> could vote based on those.
>
> I'm assuming the decision will be a committer vote but do we want some
> public discussion before this vote? Ultimately I think its a personal
> preference thing and one is unlikely to be persuaded by a group
> discussion.
>
> IMO there are at least 4 or 5 logos that I'm more then happy with.
> Its just a matter of finding the one that has the broadest appeal.
>
> Sean
>
> On 8/15/06, James Mitchell <jm...@apache.org> wrote:
>> I agree. IMHO, limiting this to one entry per person will only
>> stifle creativeness and may lead to rampant dissociative disorders,
>> including, but not limited to -- The infamous dakotajack syndrome
>> (read: multiple personality disorder ;)
>>
>>
>> --
>> James Mitchell
>> 678.910.8017
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Aug 14, 2006, at 7:32 PM, Craig McClanahan wrote:
>>
>> > On 8/14/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Forward ...
>> >>
>> >> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> >> From: Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>
>> >> Date: Aug 14, 2006 4:24 PM
>> >> Subject: Logo contest
>> >> To: MyFaces Development <de...@myfaces.apache.org>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> I have a question,
>> >>
>> >> did we allow users to upload as many logos as they want?
>> >> I more like the idea of "one user, one shot".
>> >
>> >
>> > We didn't impose any such restriction, and indeed we've received
>> > several
>> > alternative approaches from several of the submittors ... it would
>> > be unfair
>> > to make them go back and choose only one submission at this
>> point --
>> > especially as we haven't really given any advice on what our
>> decision
>> > criteria are going to be :-).
>> >
>> > Craig
>> >
>> > Just my $0.02
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Matthias Wessendorf
>> >>
>> >> further stuff:
>> >> blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
>> >> mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Matthias Wessendorf
>> >>
>> >> further stuff:
>> >> blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
>> >> mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
>> >>
>>
>>
>
Re: Logo contest
Posted by Sean Schofield <se...@gmail.com>.
I suggest when it comes time to vote we pick our top 5 and rank order
them. We can give 5 points to the first choice, 4 points to the
second, etc. The top 5 point getters could then be announced and we
could vote based on those.
I'm assuming the decision will be a committer vote but do we want some
public discussion before this vote? Ultimately I think its a personal
preference thing and one is unlikely to be persuaded by a group
discussion.
IMO there are at least 4 or 5 logos that I'm more then happy with.
Its just a matter of finding the one that has the broadest appeal.
Sean
On 8/15/06, James Mitchell <jm...@apache.org> wrote:
> I agree. IMHO, limiting this to one entry per person will only
> stifle creativeness and may lead to rampant dissociative disorders,
> including, but not limited to -- The infamous dakotajack syndrome
> (read: multiple personality disorder ;)
>
>
> --
> James Mitchell
> 678.910.8017
>
>
>
>
> On Aug 14, 2006, at 7:32 PM, Craig McClanahan wrote:
>
> > On 8/14/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> Forward ...
> >>
> >> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> >> From: Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>
> >> Date: Aug 14, 2006 4:24 PM
> >> Subject: Logo contest
> >> To: MyFaces Development <de...@myfaces.apache.org>
> >>
> >>
> >> I have a question,
> >>
> >> did we allow users to upload as many logos as they want?
> >> I more like the idea of "one user, one shot".
> >
> >
> > We didn't impose any such restriction, and indeed we've received
> > several
> > alternative approaches from several of the submittors ... it would
> > be unfair
> > to make them go back and choose only one submission at this point --
> > especially as we haven't really given any advice on what our decision
> > criteria are going to be :-).
> >
> > Craig
> >
> > Just my $0.02
> >>
> >> --
> >> Matthias Wessendorf
> >>
> >> further stuff:
> >> blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> >> mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Matthias Wessendorf
> >>
> >> further stuff:
> >> blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> >> mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> >>
>
>
Re: Logo contest
Posted by James Mitchell <jm...@apache.org>.
I agree. IMHO, limiting this to one entry per person will only
stifle creativeness and may lead to rampant dissociative disorders,
including, but not limited to -- The infamous dakotajack syndrome
(read: multiple personality disorder ;)
--
James Mitchell
678.910.8017
On Aug 14, 2006, at 7:32 PM, Craig McClanahan wrote:
> On 8/14/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> Forward ...
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>
>> Date: Aug 14, 2006 4:24 PM
>> Subject: Logo contest
>> To: MyFaces Development <de...@myfaces.apache.org>
>>
>>
>> I have a question,
>>
>> did we allow users to upload as many logos as they want?
>> I more like the idea of "one user, one shot".
>
>
> We didn't impose any such restriction, and indeed we've received
> several
> alternative approaches from several of the submittors ... it would
> be unfair
> to make them go back and choose only one submission at this point --
> especially as we haven't really given any advice on what our decision
> criteria are going to be :-).
>
> Craig
>
> Just my $0.02
>>
>> --
>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>
>> further stuff:
>> blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
>> mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
>>
>>
>> --
>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>
>> further stuff:
>> blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
>> mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
>>
Re: Logo contest
Posted by Craig McClanahan <cr...@apache.org>.
On 8/14/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Forward ...
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>
> Date: Aug 14, 2006 4:24 PM
> Subject: Logo contest
> To: MyFaces Development <de...@myfaces.apache.org>
>
>
> I have a question,
>
> did we allow users to upload as many logos as they want?
> I more like the idea of "one user, one shot".
We didn't impose any such restriction, and indeed we've received several
alternative approaches from several of the submittors ... it would be unfair
to make them go back and choose only one submission at this point --
especially as we haven't really given any advice on what our decision
criteria are going to be :-).
Craig
Just my $0.02
>
> --
> Matthias Wessendorf
>
> further stuff:
> blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
>
>
> --
> Matthias Wessendorf
>
> further stuff:
> blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
>
Fwd: Logo contest
Posted by Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>.
Forward ...
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>
Date: Aug 14, 2006 4:24 PM
Subject: Logo contest
To: MyFaces Development <de...@myfaces.apache.org>
I have a question,
did we allow users to upload as many logos as they want?
I more like the idea of "one user, one shot".
Just my $0.02
--
Matthias Wessendorf
further stuff:
blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
--
Matthias Wessendorf
further stuff:
blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com