RRS Logo

[Dev]

I think we should change the logo or get rid of it. We aren't really
affiliated with the Rational Response Squad, so it seems like false
advertising for one thing, and second of all a lot of atheists don't
like the RRS for various reasons (most of which are unclear to me) so
painting this as the "RRS newsgroup" when it isn't seems doubly
counterproductive.

Anyone else feel this way?

[Trance Gemini]

Unc was the one who added it, so you'd have to email him since he's the "real" owner. Lol.
 

--
“You can safely assume you have created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates the same people you do.” --Annie Lamott (paraphrased)

[Dev]

Either that or the RRS people until they threaten to sue.

On May 17, 11:18 am, Trance Gemini <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Trance Gemini]

On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 5:07 PM, Dev <thede...@fastmail.fm> wrote:

Either that or the RRS people until they threaten to sue.

I don't know what their policy is.

Some groups like to have their logos spread around others not so much.

I haven't been on their site in a while but that's a good point.

Why don't you email Unc and check with him? Maybe he got permission?

[Dev]

Maybe I should, although I haven't really talked to him much so maybe
it's better that you do it as co-owner. If you agree with me, that is.
If nobody else agrees with me, I'm not going to bother. It just seems
kind of wrongheaded to present a group as if it is another group, and
if it's not illegal, it's amateurish and makes the group look dumb. I
don't really want to spring that viewpoint on him through e-mail
unilaterally.

On May 17, 3:23 pm, Trance Gemini <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> out that God hates the same people you do.” --Annie Lamott (paraphrased)- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[Trance Gemini]

On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 5:31 PM, Dev <thede...@fastmail.fm> wrote:

Maybe I should, although I haven't really talked to him much so maybe
it's better that you do it as co-owner. If you agree with me, that is.
If nobody else agrees with me, I'm not going to bother. It just seems
kind of wrongheaded to present a group as if it is another group, and
if it's not illegal, it's amateurish and makes the group look dumb. I
don't really want to spring that viewpoint on him through e-mail
unilaterally.

I'm trying to access the RR site to see if there's anything there about this sort of thing but you're right it gives the impression that we're an RR group and implies an official connection when there isn't one.

I did that with EA but only because the guy invites people to do that as long you link to his site through the logo which I did.

Anyway my browser keeps getting hung on their site for some reason right now but I'll keep trying.
 

[Trance Gemini]

Hey Unc,

A concern has been raised about using the RR Logo which I agree with.

Do you have any objection to changing it?

We don't have an official affiliation with them and this could be seen as misrepresenting ourselves.

[dali_70]

Yeah, If there's no affiliation with them, there's no point in using
their logo.
What are you going to replace it with?

[Multiverse]

I never actually liked it myself but not that I give it to much
thought.

Here is my view though:

What is so FREETHINKING about a police badge?

I am certainly not against the police by any stretch of the
imagination however,

A badge as a group crest seems to signify laws and rules etc... and,

Freethinking to me is term representing not just freedom to think
without religious constraints, but, also to think outside the box.

The badge just does not seem to fit that concept although I do
understand what the inventor was intending, I don't agree he achieved
it.

So if your taking votes:

NO.

On May 17, 1:07 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:

[dali_70]

On May 18, 10:02 am, Multiverse <cuta...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:

> What is so FREETHINKING about a police badge?
>

Right. Great points.

[Multiverse]

thx:-)

[Trance Gemini]

I've sent Unc and email which I also posted to this thread and am just waiting to hear from him regarding this.

RRS does allow people to link to their site using their logo in order to advertise their site but we're not doing that so it has the potential of being a huge problem.

[Dev]

I never even thought about that, but it's a good point about the RRS.
They're presumably being ironic, but I personally don't like the idea
of the RRS being put out as the representatives of atheism, which is
part of my objection, although I would also object if we were to
peddle the logo of a more influential and important atheist group like
The Reason Project.

unc doesn't frequent this group much, and my impression is that he
gave a lot of people positions of "authority" because he wanted us to
be able to run this ourselves. I suggest we change it now, and if he
objects he gets the authority to change it back as the creator of this
group. He elevated Trance to equal ownership status, and she should
make the call.

> > Anyone else feel this way?- Hide quoted text -

[Trance Gemini]

On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 10:32 PM, Dev <thede...@fastmail.fm> wrote:

I never even thought about that, but it's a good point about the RRS.
They're presumably being ironic, but I personally don't like the idea
of the RRS being put out as the representatives of atheism, which is
part of my objection, although I would also object if we were to
peddle the logo of a more influential and important atheist group like
The Reason Project.

unc doesn't frequent this group much, and my impression is that he
gave a lot of people positions of "authority" because he wanted us to
be able to run this ourselves. I suggest we change it now, and if he
objects he gets the authority to change it back as the creator of this
group. He elevated Trance to equal ownership status, and she should
make the call.

I've already removed it. I sent him an email about a week ago (I think) and he hasn't replied.

I left it in Files so he can always put it back but we really are misrepresenting ourselves as an RRS affiliated site when we aren't and we shouldn't be doing that.
 

On May 18, 8:02 am, Multiverse <cuta...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> I never actually liked it myself but not that I give it to much
> thought.
>
> Here is my view though:
>
> What is so FREETHINKING about a police badge?
>
> I am certainly not against the police by any stretch of the
> imagination however,
>
> A badge as a group crest seems to signify laws and rules etc... and,
>
> Freethinking to me is term representing not just freedom to think
> without religious constraints, but, also to think outside the box.
>
> The badge just does not seem to fit that concept although I do
> understand what the inventor was intending, I don't agree he achieved
> it.
>
> So if your taking votes:
>
> NO.
>
> On May 17, 1:07 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
>
>
> > I think we should change the logo or get rid of it. We aren't really
> > affiliated with the Rational Response Squad, so it seems like false
> > advertising for one thing, and second of all a lot of atheists don't
> > like the RRS for various reasons (most of which are unclear to me) so
> > painting this as the "RRS newsgroup" when it isn't seems doubly
> > counterproductive.
>

> > Anyone else feel this way?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[Trance Gemini]

I haven't put anything there but if you guys have any ideas for a
replacement let me know.

[Multiverse]

Miss January?

Just a thought:-)

[Trance Gemini]

On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 9:02 AM, Multiverse <cut...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:

Miss January?

Just a thought:-)

Lol. No.

Nobody who looks better than me gets their pic on the Home Page. ;-)