Forum
Logo Designer
Since my last few issues here in LT I came up with a few things that I would like to comment on...
1. LC
75% (15/20) pro votes to win
That analogy (75%) is very logical but limiting the votes to twenty is not, once 6 votes are cast against, the LC ends there and that could happen for many reasons out of randomness and could even be reversed through conversation which could reveal details not noticed before. Votes should not be limited but time should, keeping the same analogy to win.
2. Phases
What is the purpose of blind phase if in the finalist phase anyone could steer away from their initial concept and still copy the leaders of the contest? The only purpose that blind phase serves is that two designers with the same mindset to make a similar entry blindfolded could claim the concept which is good for productivity but other than that...
Also why in selection mode 1st ranked designer could be changed? two chances 10+ days were not enough for CH to decide and for Designers to offer their concepts? What if like in my case the designer(me) was working with the CH providing 30+ revisions in those days and then outranked by someone who had plenty of time to artistically manipulate the system and use similar elements to yours? How is that fair?
1. LC
75% (15/20) pro votes to win
That analogy (75%) is very logical but limiting the votes to twenty is not, once 6 votes are cast against, the LC ends there and that could happen for many reasons out of randomness and could even be reversed through conversation which could reveal details not noticed before. Votes should not be limited but time should, keeping the same analogy to win.
2. Phases
What is the purpose of blind phase if in the finalist phase anyone could steer away from their initial concept and still copy the leaders of the contest? The only purpose that blind phase serves is that two designers with the same mindset to make a similar entry blindfolded could claim the concept which is good for productivity but other than that...
Also why in selection mode 1st ranked designer could be changed? two chances 10+ days were not enough for CH to decide and for Designers to offer their concepts? What if like in my case the designer(me) was working with the CH providing 30+ revisions in those days and then outranked by someone who had plenty of time to artistically manipulate the system and use similar elements to yours? How is that fair?
Logo Designer
Totally agree specially on "2.Phases (all paragraph).. Sometimes its frustrating that in blind phase CH rank you 1st. After blind phase all finalist designers then seen your entry and develop a new kind of layout which is very far from there blind phase entries which if you always noticed all there new entries ideas are always came from 1st rank idea but sometimes with a tweak to make not obvious. So then i use there tactics also because this is a contest, i have to think some idea to win. I dot know if it is possible here to develop only the entries which is done in blind phase and not to make another entry which is far from your blind phase entry. But again we designer also have to satisfy our clients, so i dont know if it is possible :) ..Cheers!
Logo Designer
@scott0082
@vmax
Based on the most recent Logo Court cases, the TOP 5 Phase must be blind as well!
@vmax
Based on the most recent Logo Court cases, the TOP 5 Phase must be blind as well!
Logo Designer
@scott0082
@vmax
Based on the most recent Logo Court cases, the TOP 5 Phase must be blind as well!
@vmax
Based on the most recent Logo Court cases, the TOP 5 Phase must be blind as well!
Well, based on the last page (most recent) of the Logo Court section, the system seems to be working pretty well in weeding out the least worthy of us. (included myself even tho' I haven't had a LC in.. I don't know how long)
As far as the Top5 phase issue goes, well, that's bound to happen since we're on a CROWDsourcing site. Even the CHs pull their favorites in the same direction (layouts, colors, etc) through feedback. It's one thing to blatantly copy and follow the 1st ranked like a stalker and it's another to make minor tweaks that might appeal to the client.
Most of the times, a simple layout, a color scheme, a font WILL NOT be decisive towards winning a contest. For the times it really is, thank God we have the LogoCourt system, which I already said -I think- it's working.
On top of that, we, thank God again (hope He doesn't mark me as SPAM), have Ivan who can intervene in the cases that are on the edge.
Logo Designer
@scott0082
I don't follow your logic about the logo court. If you agree that a 75% majority vote should be decisive, then it follows that the total number of votes should be capped. Maybe you could argue the cap should be higher than 20, but you would still have fundamentally the same issue.
As for the blind phase, I honestly think its been a massive success. Of course there will continue to be differences of opinion, but the numbers of disputes have dropped dramatically since LT introduced the blind opening round.
I don't think there is such a thing as a 'perfect' solution to all the challenges a community like LT faces. There will ALWAYS be scenarios that the current processes struggle to deal with. But, I do think that, on balance, LT is miles ahead of its peers in pretty much every regard.
Edit to add...
As a community of designers, we have to take on board the idea of what is and what isn't considered an 'obvious' concept. We've discussed this ad nauseam in the past, so this isn't the place to rehash old debates, but a decision was taken that an obvious concept can be used by any designer at any stage of the contest.
In practice:
Designer A submits a rooftop (obvious concept) in the blind phase of a realty contest and is ranked 1st
Designer B submits a wordmark in the blind phase of the same contest and is ranked 2nd
In this scenario, Designer B is entitled to submit a rooftop concept in the final round, so long as the design is 'different enough'.
I don't follow your logic about the logo court. If you agree that a 75% majority vote should be decisive, then it follows that the total number of votes should be capped. Maybe you could argue the cap should be higher than 20, but you would still have fundamentally the same issue.
As for the blind phase, I honestly think its been a massive success. Of course there will continue to be differences of opinion, but the numbers of disputes have dropped dramatically since LT introduced the blind opening round.
I don't think there is such a thing as a 'perfect' solution to all the challenges a community like LT faces. There will ALWAYS be scenarios that the current processes struggle to deal with. But, I do think that, on balance, LT is miles ahead of its peers in pretty much every regard.
Edit to add...
As a community of designers, we have to take on board the idea of what is and what isn't considered an 'obvious' concept. We've discussed this ad nauseam in the past, so this isn't the place to rehash old debates, but a decision was taken that an obvious concept can be used by any designer at any stage of the contest.
In practice:
Designer A submits a rooftop (obvious concept) in the blind phase of a realty contest and is ranked 1st
Designer B submits a wordmark in the blind phase of the same contest and is ranked 2nd
In this scenario, Designer B is entitled to submit a rooftop concept in the final round, so long as the design is 'different enough'.
Logo Designer
why is this in general rather than designer discussion? That is just wrong.
Logo Designer
@rendraG a 75% could be achieved without a cap. Shocker right? Think about it. I got a dice, if I throw it 4 times and 3 of them lands a two that's 75% of the times. If I throw it 40 times and 30 of them lands a two, again 75%, 75 out of 100, 150 out of 200 still that's 75% and so on.
Now if I add a limit to how many times you could roll the dice, say you got 4 times to land a two then if you don't land a two in the first two rolls it stops there. So if there isn't a limit on how MANY times but on how MUCH time, -say you got four minutes to bring a percentage of 75% or higher-, you could throw the dice 100 times in that time frame and sum the results when time ends. That gives you more chances right?
Now dice is not a good analogy here cause it's governed only by luck, except if you got a rigged dice of course. It was an example to explain the relation between percentage and number of chances.
In our case where discussion and decisions are made is completely different. If I got 6 friends that are willing to vote for me I win, randomness could play a role, if it's head to head say 6 to 5 I still win thats 54.5% and I still win cause theres a limit on votes that doesen't allow the losing party to have more chances to explain his/her self or correct someone who made a false comment that will affect more designers in their future votes. And so on. I think I'll stop here. Tell me if this is clear enough
Now if I add a limit to how many times you could roll the dice, say you got 4 times to land a two then if you don't land a two in the first two rolls it stops there. So if there isn't a limit on how MANY times but on how MUCH time, -say you got four minutes to bring a percentage of 75% or higher-, you could throw the dice 100 times in that time frame and sum the results when time ends. That gives you more chances right?
Now dice is not a good analogy here cause it's governed only by luck, except if you got a rigged dice of course. It was an example to explain the relation between percentage and number of chances.
In our case where discussion and decisions are made is completely different. If I got 6 friends that are willing to vote for me I win, randomness could play a role, if it's head to head say 6 to 5 I still win thats 54.5% and I still win cause theres a limit on votes that doesen't allow the losing party to have more chances to explain his/her self or correct someone who made a false comment that will affect more designers in their future votes. And so on. I think I'll stop here. Tell me if this is clear enough
Logo Designer
@scott0082
Apologies, I didn't explain my reasoning fully.
I don't agree with having time-limited disputes. As I said above, no system is perfect and time-limited disputes could end up with different LCs being won with wildly different vote counts. In my view, that is far less equitable than our current system.
Apologies, I didn't explain my reasoning fully.
I don't agree with having time-limited disputes. As I said above, no system is perfect and time-limited disputes could end up with different LCs being won with wildly different vote counts. In my view, that is far less equitable than our current system.