I agree here, is this an icon contest or an icon discussion? No, I'm not a prominent community member, but this is kind of bugging me. If it is a contest, there should be ONE winner, if it's a discussion, there should be a picking and choosing. I'd prefer a pick and choose for each icon type, but the fact that there is a contest suggests ONE and ONLY winner.
I'm with Jorge on this. Decide if it's a contest or a "discussion."
- joe
Hi Curtis,
It does not matter that this is an open source project; the problem with being so open is that the line between what is a discussion that leads to a decision and the decision itself becomes blurred. The result is that you have lots of bits and pieces of information about a single topic spread all over the place, some of which may even contradict one another, and making sense of it all can be difficult and open to interpretation. What looked like a simple "we are having a contest; submit your work and everyone will vote to choose the best" message (that's what I thought it was from reading the announcement) seems to have turned into something different that few know what exactly is.
Specifically, although I understand everything that has been said, it is still unclear to me how Haiku plans to come out with a new icon set. Statements such as "we will discuss" and the like are good generalities, but do not clearly define how you will come up with the icon set that Haiku needs, given that no single icon set is chosen from the contest.
So, artists will submit their work, people will vote (or rate) the icon sets, and then what? Will you mix and match the best rated (don't know if that is viable)? Will someone (from Haiku?) create an icon set based based on the submissions and the feedback from the community? What am I missing?
Expecting people to follow/read all the posts on mailings lists and forums is not realistic. Which is why, if you think in terms of both building/growing the community as well as that of presenting the project to the world with a consistent/clear message, it is much more effective to have a single unified (official) voice to the outside world. If that requires the decision-making process to be closed, so be it. In the case of the icon contest, the people will still have a chance to influence the outcome of the contest by voting, so although the decision process may not be open, the contest itself is.
Koki
Curtis Wanner wrote: > Koki wrote: > >> Different people seem to be making different interpretations of the same >> > thing. Haiku announced a contest (headline >quoted from haiku- > >> os.org: "Announcing the Haiku Icon Contest"), so that's what it should be. >> > And contests have clear winners; that is the >nature of any contest. > > It is a contest in that we are trying to choose the best design ideas. You > have to remember this is an open source project and as such input is > expected from the community. This is the main reason for the contest, to > allow the public to provide input on the final design. So discussion is > going to be a natural part of the process. > > >> This was never stated in the official announcement of the contest, which is >> > what people will go by with. > > It is stated : > "To cut a long story short, we want to have shiny new vector icons and since > Haiku is an open project, we're going to vote on the new design." > > It does NOT state "we're going to vote on the new icon set". Although, I do > agree it could have perhaps been worded a bit differently. Some of the > confusion is the result of the international scope of the project. > > >> If this was not supposed to be a contest, then it would have been better >> > articulated by announcing a "Haiku Icon >Debate", "Haiku Icon Counsel" or > the like, clearly stating that submissions would be subject to discussion by > the >community, and that the final artwork could be a combination of various > submissions. > > >> Leaving things too much open to interpretation is an invitation to >> > confusion, and I think this is what is happening here. > > It's less about leaving it "open" to interpretation as it is to leave it > "open" to discussion since "Haiku is an open project". It has become > apparent that the response to this event is much greater than we > anticipated. So as a result we have to finalize the details to avoid > further confusion. This is why we greatly appreciate your comments and work > on the wiki page. I have done updates on the English version. I still need > to add information on the rating process. > > >> (internal) communication leading to the decision-making would be best done >> > off the list before anything is >announced to the outside world. I think > this would best serve the goal of Haiku, as it would present a unified > message >that is easier to follow. Perhaps the > > Being an open source project, many of the decisions are subject to > discussion with the community. While there has been some discussion off the > list, we felt it best that the decisions made be transparent and subject to > comment on the list. > Instead of waiting a month until we finalized all the details, it was felt > best that we move forward with the submissions in the mean time. Perhaps > that was the mistake on our part. > > As for declaring a winner, a "Best Design Idea" award might be appropriate. > However, I believe all those who contribute their own original design ideas > deserve recognition. This is all subject to discussion as well. I didn't > wish to shoot down your idea about the certificate. I just wanted to state > the reasons why it could be problematic. We could have people submitting > all sorts of readily available icon sets just to get an award. This would > not contribute to the project. > > Curtis >