Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

What Really Happened To Ubuntu's Edgy Artwork?

Posted by kdawson on Tue Nov 14, 2006 09:47 PM
from the more-dapper-than-edgy dept.
angrykeyboarder writes, "Many Ubuntu users expressed surprise, dismay, and disappointment when Mark Shuttleworth (sabdfl) nixed the popular community-developed artwork during the beta phase of Ubuntu 6.10 ('The Edgy Eft'). Some Ubuntu community members were downright shocked, and many were ultimately dissatisfied with the final product. What exactly happened? Short answer: the Art Team was less disturbed than some other community members were. Linux.com has the scoop." Slashdot and Linux.com are both part of OSTG.

Related Stories

[+] Make Linux "Gorgeous," Says Ubuntu Leader 688 comments
OSS_ilation writes "They say beauty is only skin deep, but when it comes to Linux and the free software movement, people like Mark Shuttleworth think looks have an important part to play. On his blog and an article on SearchOpenSource.com, Shuttleworth and a slew of open source end users say that the look and feel of open source is also a matter of wider acceptance among enterprise players who are used to Windows, yet crave Mac OS X and the functionality of Linux. 'If we want the world to embrace free software, we have to make it beautiful,' Shuttleworth said. "We have to make it gorgeous. We have to make it easy on the eye. We have to make it take your friend's breath away.' With the early success of Novell SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 10, Shuttleworth and company may be onto something."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • Approval (Score:1)

    by Ninjaesque One (902204) on Tuesday November 14 2006, @09:53PM (#16847802)
    (Last Journal: Saturday July 23 2005, @11:16PM)
    So lacking of red tape, they don't even care about their seniors' opinions!

    They should issue an official statement of chastisement against themselves!
  • Sex Bad Violence Good (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 14 2006, @09:54PM (#16847806)
    Is anyone surprised?

    What a society - where killing untold thousands of people in far off lands is fine, but showing pictures of the human body is taboo.
    • Re:Sex Bad Violence Good (Score:4, Funny)

      by kfg (145172) on Tuesday November 14 2006, @10:30PM (#16848104)
      . . .showing pictures of the human body is taboo.

      It wasn't even intended. It was just a GUI malfunction.

      KFG
      [ Parent ]
    • by arthurpaliden (939626) on Tuesday November 14 2006, @10:40PM (#16848176)
      The reason is quite simple. It takes more money to raise a child than to bury a person.
      [ Parent ]
    • Re:Sex Bad Violence Good by Planesdragon (Score:1) Tuesday November 14 2006, @10:58PM
    • Re:Sex Bad Violence Good by Just Some Guy (Score:2) Wednesday November 15 2006, @08:05AM
    • !!!!GOATSE ALERT!!! N/T by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Tuesday November 14 2006, @10:49PM
    • Re:Sex Bad Violence Good by Anonymous Coward (Score:2) Tuesday November 14 2006, @11:00PM
      • Re:Sex Bad Violence Good (Score:5, Interesting)

        by LordLucless (582312) on Wednesday November 15 2006, @01:23AM (#16849022)
        Oooh, so you're not talking about actual sex or violence, you're talking about simulated sex and violence. Because it's bloody obvious that most societies disapprove ov violence more than sex - even in the US, I think you're birth rate is still higher than your murder-rate. I'd say the reason people are more okay with violence on the screen than sex is that they consider it unlikely that little Johnnie is going to go out and blow up a city block with a bazooka from a commandeered humvee no matter how many action flicks he sees. If he watches a lot of skin flicks though, it's probably going to give him ideas next time he's alone with little Sally.

        Violence is obviously wrong, and you can usually rely on that as enough of a disincentive to discourage it. Even if you can't, the availability of bazookas also limits it. Sex, on the other hand isn't obviously wrong like violence, but it can lead to unwanted and unconsidered consequences - pregnancy, disease, etc, as well as increasing the complexity and intensity of a relationship. It has to be discouraged because it's so available - whereas violence of the action-movie sort remains remote; the viewer is rarely going to be in a situation where they could emulate it.
        [ Parent ]
        • Reread, please. by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Wednesday November 15 2006, @03:14AM
        • Re:Sex Bad Violence Good by AntiDragon (Score:2) Wednesday November 15 2006, @07:52AM
        • Re:Sex Bad Violence Good by rbochan (Score:2) Wednesday November 15 2006, @09:32AM
        • Re:Sex Bad Violence Good (Score:4, Funny)

          by LordLucless (582312) on Wednesday November 15 2006, @02:43AM (#16849342)
          Let me know next time your sandwich knocks you up.
          [ Parent ]
        • Re:Sex Bad Violence Good by c6gunner (Score:3) Wednesday November 15 2006, @03:22AM
        • Re:Sex Bad Violence Good by the_womble (Score:3) Wednesday November 15 2006, @03:42AM
          • Re:Sex Bad Violence Good (Score:4, Insightful)

            by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 15 2006, @03:59AM (#16849626)
            EXACTLY! If society tells you sex is dirty and wrong and should be hidden, is it really any surprise it becomes such? Thanks for providing a PERFECT argument against your own.

            More talk of sex, I say! Fewer young people learning about it through rumor, innuendo, porno mags passed around, and spam email that lead them to believe every woman is a "slut in heat" and that "every man has a horse cock." Treat and address sex in a healthy manner, shown in a contextually appropriate setting where potential consequences are considered and you may not have children having babies because they are driven by their hormones with no information.

            Put it this way, if the only people you ever see having sex are in a plastic, promiscuous, consequence free world with crappy disco music, what examples do you have of healthy sex life between monogamous, loving adults that RESPECT each other. If all our other behavior patterns are learned by observation and emulation of parents and other role-models, why is sex the single exception? People have no idea of what role sex should play in their lives in the real world and are left with only basic hormonal urges and porno movies for guidance. That makes no sense to me. I mean, that kind of plan worked so well with prohibition and all....
            [ Parent ]
          • Re:Sex Bad Violence Good by Carewolf (Score:3) Wednesday November 15 2006, @06:56AM
          • Re:Sex Bad Violence Good by Dragonslicer (Score:1) Wednesday November 15 2006, @07:32AM
          • Re:Sex Bad Violence Good by Parc Edmond Klein (Score:1) Wednesday November 15 2006, @08:12AM
          • Re:Sex Bad Violence Good by nelsonal (Score:2) Wednesday November 15 2006, @08:34AM
          • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
        • Re:Sex Bad Violence Good by Bloke down the pub (Score:1) Wednesday November 15 2006, @08:08AM
        • Re:Sex Bad Violence Good by somersault (Score:3) Wednesday November 15 2006, @10:33AM
          • Re:Nyah nyah by slaida1 (Score:1) Thursday November 16 2006, @07:52AM
            • Re:Nyah nyah by somersault (Score:2) Thursday November 16 2006, @08:01AM
        • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
      • Re:Sex Bad Violence Good by Daengbo (Score:1) Wednesday November 15 2006, @08:26AM
    • Re:Sex Bad Violence Good (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Eideewt (603267) on Tuesday November 14 2006, @11:58PM (#16848618)
      Why wouldn't someone want naked people on their desktop? When I consider all the stupid wallpapers I've seen (anime characters, eggs, tiny photos stretched out of proportion, and so on), naked people seems like a big step in the right direction.
      [ Parent ]
    • Re:Sex Bad Violence Good by Zonk (troll) (Score:3) Wednesday November 15 2006, @07:19AM
    • Re:Sex Bad Violence Good by flight_master (Score:1) Wednesday November 15 2006, @09:37AM
    • Re:Sex Bad Violence Good by PastaLover (Score:1) Saturday November 18 2006, @11:32AM
    • 3 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • ok, I'm pissed (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 14 2006, @09:55PM (#16847816)
    this really pisses me off. Would it be so fucking hard to just fucking link to an example of "edgy art" Jesus. They have links that go to text, and links on the text pages go to more text. Hello? Don't waste my time with this. Just show me the art which is the subject of the article.
    • Re:ok, I'm pissed by Alkivar (Score:2) Tuesday November 14 2006, @09:59PM
    • I found some... (Score:5, Informative)

      by FooAtWFU (699187) on Tuesday November 14 2006, @10:03PM (#16847870)
      (http://fennecfoxen.org/)
      Found some... with some digging. Peace [ubuntu.com], Tropic [ubuntu.com] and Blubuntu [ubuntu.com].
      [ Parent ]
    • Re:ok, I'm pissed by Profane MuthaFucka (Score:1) Tuesday November 14 2006, @10:04PM
    • Re:ok, I'm pissed (Score:5, Informative)

      by MustardMan (52102) on Tuesday November 14 2006, @10:05PM (#16847900)
      Digging around the wiki, this is what I could come up with...

      https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Artwork/Specs/EdgyArtworkP lan/Polish/Incoming [ubuntu.com]

      Now, assuming this is the art in question, which I wouldn't know for sure, not only is this a completely shitty non-article, it's also a terrible headline. The whole 'edgy' pun attempts to make it sound like they had naked women or something, when in fact it's plain old boring splash screens with round letters and glossy effects. Snore. I guess they had to do SOMETHING to attempt to make this look like it might be newsworthy, so why not throw a potentially sensational headline out there.
      [ Parent ]
    • Re:ok, I'm pissed by Einstein_101 (Score:1) Tuesday November 14 2006, @10:15PM
    • Re:ok, I'm pissed by xenocide2 (Score:3) Tuesday November 14 2006, @10:21PM
      • Re:ok, I'm pissed (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Aqua OS X (458522) on Wednesday November 15 2006, @04:37AM (#16849802)
        (http://www.designpoolstudio.com/)
        "Maybe some day an ambitious junior college graphics design course will have "make a gdk theme" for a project instead of the silly fake things they do now (obviously this would be more online oriented than print oriented)."

        Aiming high huh? Let's get some Junior College kids to skin an OS in a semester.

        IHMO this is one of the major hurdle's facing Linux adoption outside of the IT arena. Very few people in the software development industry fully understand visual communication, interactive design, and or the design process. Interactive design is viewed as some sort of BS skinning process that can be pumped out by some peons in a few months.

        Interactive design for an OS should be conducted by a team of professional interactive designers. They should understand visual communication, cognitive psychology, quantitative / qualitative usability research, and at least a CS101 understanding of what a conditional statement, class, etc is. These people should be given 6 months to a year (if not longer) to do their work. They should be paid a salary which doesn't force them to live in their parent's basements. Furthermore, they should work with software engineering to build an interactive design specification that is adhered to religiously and implemented as closely as humanly possible.

        Themes are retarded. They almost always result in something spec'd by software engineers and turd-polished by a lame underpaid or inexperienced graphic designer.
        [ Parent ]
      • Re:ok, I'm pissed by bit01 (Score:2) Wednesday November 15 2006, @04:37AM
    • Re:ok, I'm pissed by GenKreton (Score:2) Tuesday November 14 2006, @11:38PM
    • Re:ok, I'm pissed by Wavicle (Score:2) Tuesday November 14 2006, @11:47PM
    • The edgy artwork went to Microsoft! by StreetStealth (Score:1) Wednesday November 15 2006, @12:16AM
    • Re:ok, I'm pissed by c_forq (Score:3) Tuesday November 14 2006, @11:15PM
    • 3 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • Screenshot? (Score:2, Redundant)

    by catbutt (469582) on Tuesday November 14 2006, @09:59PM (#16847838)
    ...or something? Call me shallow but I'd like to look at some pictures.
  • Screenshots (Score:2, Informative)

    by adrenalinekick (884201) on Tuesday November 14 2006, @10:04PM (#16847876)
  • "Edgy Eft"? (Score:1, Troll)

    by meme_police (645420) on Tuesday November 14 2006, @10:15PM (#16847982)
    "Feisty"? Political fallout over art work? My goodness I'm glad I left Linux behind for OpenBSD last millenium. Nothing sounds better to me than -current and -stable. And the art and tunes of OpenBSD consistently rock:

    http://openbsd.org/lyrics.html [openbsd.org]

    • Re:"Edgy Eft"? by cptgrudge (Score:3) Tuesday November 14 2006, @11:31PM
      • Re:"Edgy Eft"? by meme_police (Score:2) Wednesday November 15 2006, @03:30PM
    • Re:"Edgy Eft"? by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Tuesday November 14 2006, @11:37PM
    • Re:"Edgy Eft"? by deek (Score:2) Wednesday November 15 2006, @12:03AM
  • Edgy is the name of the release! (Score:5, Informative)

    by DragonHawk (21256) on Tuesday November 14 2006, @10:24PM (#16848058)
    (http://slashdot.org/ | Last Journal: Saturday November 18 2006, @08:52AM)
    "Edgy Eft" is the "nick-name" of the release of Ubuntu. Like "Woody" was a Debian release and "Zod" was a Fedora release.

    "Edgy art" does not refer to "provocative art", but "art for the 'Edge Eft' release".

    All Ubuntu releases are named with an adjective and an animal, and they have to alliterate. I have no idea why.

    Sheesh.
  • is this irrelevant or what (Score:5, Insightful)

    by daniel23 (605413) on Tuesday November 14 2006, @10:27PM (#16848082)

    sorry, this is a part of OSS culture I entirely fail to understand. Like, when there is a new version of distro X and some OS News sites have nothing better to report than a 15 pages of hires screenshots of the default desktop etc.

    You mean you install a new distro and then judge its worth by the look of the default theme? You don't change the theme first thing? You don't know how to install a custom theme if you don't like the preconfigured choices?

    But then again, my boxen run headless 98% of the time, so why should I care...
  • Ooohhh, Shiny... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by tymbow (725036) on Tuesday November 14 2006, @10:30PM (#16848100)

    I don't know what direction was required for the art, but the samples have that "ooohhh shiny" web 2.0 feel to them so they just must be better :p

    Meeehhh, it will all change again anyway when everyone jumps on the Web 3.0 graphic design bandwagon or whatever the next hot trend will be.

  • What? I'm shocked too! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by bogaboga (793279) on Tuesday November 14 2006, @10:38PM (#16848160)
    Some Ubuntu community members were downright shocked, and many were ultimately dissatisfied with the final product.

    Why should this happen? Why should "some community members" be shocked if Ubuntu is being developed as "an Open Source OS?" And I guess they were following Ubuntu's development pretty closely.

    I need this question answered: Is Mark Shuttleworth a benevolent dictator in Ubuntu's Development?

  • by dantheman82 (765429) on Tuesday November 14 2006, @11:05PM (#16848318)
    (http://danlipsy.tk/)
    Chief artist head honcho summed it up: "We set out to start from scratch and to top Dapper, while Dapper was arguably very close to what Mark had in mind."

    Hmm...sort of reminds me of the Slashdot CSS Redesign Contest [slashdot.org]. Need the Slashdot "Shade of Green" and Coliseo font. Basically it has to be very similar to the old one, but better. Sometimes it fades into the background once the hubbub dies down...as people realize that visual continuity and product branding do count for something...
  • Ever wonder why the icons look nice? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Chief Typist (110285) on Tuesday November 14 2006, @11:29PM (#16848420)
    (http://iconfactory.com/)
    The icons were professionally designed:

    http://iconfactory.com/design/detail/ubuntu [iconfactory.com]

    By one guy. Working directly with Mark.

    My suggestion for the art team would be to establish someone as an art director. Someone that Mark trusts to implement his vision. And then have that art director give specific tasks to the designers that report to him.

    It sounds like they're heading in that direction by giving Frank Stroep the title of "Artist in Chief". His task now is to tell people what he wants. And if you think it's easy being a hard ass when it comes to design & the people who do it, let me assure you IT IS NOT.

    If this doesn't happen, they'll end up taking the "design by committee" approach. The result of this kind of process is something that no one loves -- a lowest common denominator. Sort of like when software is designed by a committee :-)

    For what it's worth, I'm a principal in the company that did the Ubuntu work -- so I speak from experience about this stuff :-)

    -ch

  • by martijnd (148684) on Tuesday November 14 2006, @11:30PM (#16848426)
    Having installed Edgy on a couple of computer these last few days, and upgraded a few Dapper machines, I find its artwork pretty relaxing. I didn't like the brown colors at first, but you get used to it very quickly.

    Efty's new boot up logo looks much better than the old one, and I am happy that they got rid of all the boot up messages on start-up, which was just distracting crud.

    Nice one -- on the computers I installed it on, it just worked and the upgrades went smootly. Your milage may vary of course.

  • by uridotchi (995402) on Tuesday November 14 2006, @11:53PM (#16848584)
    who flippin cares??!!! just install vista! :P
  • Still needs work. (Score:2)

    by MaWeiTao (908546) on Tuesday November 14 2006, @11:54PM (#16848588)
    (http://designelement.us/)
    While we're on the subject of how Ubuntu works, someone should come up with a new logo for the system. It probably means something to someone but I don't think it's being effectively conveyed. Furthermore, it doesn't translate well to small sizes which is a big problem considering that's how it's going to appear often in the OS. It looks like an indistinguishable ring of colors.

    The Ubuntu name also fights with the graphic. It looks like each element was designed by two different people and forced together. In fact, the Ubuntu font face is unique enough on it's own that it doesn't even need the graphic. All it might need is a more compelling graphical treatment sort of like what Apple has done with the OS X mark; I'm not saying that the glass look should be copied, mind you.

    Regarding this theme, I don't see what makes this newsworthy. The theme itself is bad, but it certainly isn't anything out of this world. In fact, in my opinion, it still lacks the polish of OS X , XP or Vista. It's got some interesting features but nothing compelling or particularly unique.

    The problem with these systems is that they don't have a series of rules defining how look and feel. In the end it always comes down to some guy doing something because it looks pretty and not really considering the overall experience. It's kind of like contemporary Japanese cars where designers have gotten overly fixated on these elaborate tail light designs that don't quite fit the rest of the car.

    I'm all for an innovative interface, but it should be functional. This Edgy theme to me looks like someone took Vista's graphical elements and applied them to a OS X type interface.
  • I'm assuming this is the artwork.. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by msimm (580077) on Tuesday November 14 2006, @11:55PM (#16848598)
    (http://www.last.fm/)
    They are talking about [wordpress.com]. I'm not a big fan of brown or generally dark colors on my desktop.

    As for the complaining, I'm a bit perplexed:
    "A prominent factor in much of the submitted artwork -- which is still publicly available -- is the use of visual effects, yet even as the feature freeze approached, there were still unsolved technical problems, such as inconsistency between color palettes. After Shuttleworth announced the rollback, Stroep, Jonathan Austin, and Jozsef Mak reworked the Dapper art packages for consistency, and limited the effects enhancements to a gloss finish."
    That sounds like a legitimate enough problem. Unfinished artwork and effects can make a distro look amateurish.

    Besides, I thought the point of OSS is the flexibility that comes with it? Are these Ubuntu users going to be forced to use it.
  • by joe_n_bloe (244407) on Wednesday November 15 2006, @12:11AM (#16848702)
    (http://www.5sigma.com/joseph)
    Please, my computer desktop should take me to that fantasy land where everything is blue and green and aqua forever. It shouldn't make me think about global warming.

    Also, there's the problem that orange, yellow, red, and brown are fast food colors. Don't we computer nerds eat enough already?
  • by Shadyman (939863) on Wednesday November 15 2006, @01:25AM (#16849030)
    (http://erroraccessdenied.com/)
    At the risk of starting a Gnome vs KDE war, For everyone complaining about how ugly the default Ubuntu theme is in Edgy, why not look at the Kubuntu eyecandy?

    http://www.thecodingstudio.com/opensource/linux/sc reenshots/index.php?linux_distribution=Kubuntu%206 .10 [thecodingstudio.com]
  • Backgrounds and splash screens (Score:3, Interesting)

    by wysiwia (932559) on Wednesday November 15 2006, @01:33AM (#16849074)
    (http://wyoguide.sf.net/)
    What a achievement, new backgrounds and splash screens! I thought 'Edgy Eft' was meant to try out some new kinds of technology or some new kind of user interactions. I even hoped there might be some provocative design decisions which allows to bring the Linux desktop a footprint forward. Yet backgrounds and splash screens don't improve my working system by a single inch. So what's so edgy on 'Edgy Eft'?

    O. Wyss
  • by Cafe Alpha (891670) on Wednesday November 15 2006, @01:44AM (#16849114)
    Start <a href="https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Artwork/Specs/EdgyAr tworkPlan/Ponder">here</a>

    I noticed that those textures on the front page are annoyingly vivid stuff that I would never want on a desktop.

    But searching through the maze of submissions I found a few that I thought were cooler that what's was in there.

    But really, there was a lot of annoying artwork, all better packaged as optional than as default.

    As far as I can tell Ubuntu installation disks are currently limited to CD size, not DVD size, so there probably isn't a lot of extra space for alternate art. Given that fact, I think artwork really belongs in a separate package.

    I'd rather see features than artwork given the choice. If it were up to me, it would come with a firewall control gui, Wine, Eclipse and Sun Java etc. Though it's not as bad as Linspire in requiring an internet connection to get any features.

    I wonder why there isn't a DVD install version for people who won't have access to the internet after install. That would be awfully useful in packaging for countries where fast internet access isn't a given.

    I suppose that the licensing is the reason there's no Sun Java, but since Java was just GPL released this week, I hope future versions will have it.
  • They are in the repositories! (Score:2, Informative)

    by reidleake (818488) on Wednesday November 15 2006, @02:30AM (#16849294)
    If you like the screenshots (links posted earlier) for Peace, Tropic, and Blubuntu, then install them through your favorite package manager - they are in the Ubuntu repos.
  • by Fonce (635723) <msmunter AT gmail DOT com> on Wednesday November 15 2006, @03:26AM (#16849480)
    (http://www.slashdot.org/)
    I'll tell you what happened; That damn duck ate it and pretty soon it'll be a smear on your windshield. Stupid drake, always having to steal the spotlight. He should be more careful around hunting season.
  • by GauteL (29207) on Wednesday November 15 2006, @06:20AM (#16850158)
    (http://lindkvis.blogspot.com/)
    .. and it should come as no surprise than anyone would turn it down.

    What IS disappointing about Edgy Eft is that the release was at first intended to be edgy and risky, because they had the Long Term Support release, Dapper Drake, to suggest to anyone wanting something conservative and stable.

    In the end the only thing edgy in the release was the new event based startup system which isn't yet that visible for the end-user. People can say what they want about 'Edgy Eft' just being a name, but it was fairly clear from Shuttleworth's early emails that the name wasn't just chosen at random.

    Edgy is thus the most (and possibly the only) disappointing Ubuntu release so far. It is not bad, it is just nothing like what was intended.
  • by gramji (875033) on Wednesday November 15 2006, @07:01AM (#16850326)
    (http://ossandcad.blogspot.com/)
    How did this conversation go from Ubuntu art to murder and sex? Very interesting comments though.
  • by lems1 (163074) on Wednesday November 15 2006, @08:00AM (#16850652)
    (http://lems.kiskeyix.org/)
    This post really expresses what the community felt about this change:

    https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-art/2006- October/003433.html [ubuntu.com]



    Hey all,

    I'd just like to say (not that I have any sway in these matters) I
    strongly disagree with the decision to revert to Dapper artwork for
    Edgy. [If I have gotten the wrong impression about this please ignore
    the silly rant below]

    While I realise it might not meet the sabdfl's expectations or other
    Canonical management folk, and ultimately it is his distribution, I
    think that it is a bad idea to abandon the new, community driven, Edgy
    artwork.

    It's Edgy - that was meant to mean that dev's could put new,
    disruptive ideas into the distribution without fear that they may be a
    little rough around the edges. I think the same should apply to
    artwork - it was meant to be an experiment in community created
    artwork, and although it may be a little rough around the edges in
    places, I think the beta art and the implementations on the wiki
    *rock*

    In fact the sabd himself said [on the artwork] "I'm sure there will be
    rough edges in Edgy - that's the point " [1]

  • by friar_athanasius (1024239) on Wednesday November 15 2006, @08:39AM (#16850958)
    (http://ofmi.net/)
    The login music is disappointing too, sounds like something lifted from the Lion King soundtrack. At least we're not stuck with only Blue, Olive Green or Silver for theme choices.
  • by ishmalius (153450) on Wednesday November 15 2006, @09:29AM (#16851630)
    It is the responsible and moral thing to do to be careful when asking for people to donate their time and effort to a project. When the pool of contributors has likely invested thousands of hours of labor into a project, one must be ready to at least have a little bit of willingness to accept the products of their toils graciously.

    This is similar to seti@home asking for millions of contributors to donate their resources, yet allow from them absolutely no input into the experiment itself. Quite a few people bailed on the project because of a perceived ivory tower attitude. Look, don't touch!

    People asking for volunteers should heed Henry V: "But if the cause be not good, the king himself hath a heavy reckoning to make"

  • I am a stupid puppet (Score:2, Insightful)

    by JPriest (547211) on Wednesday November 15 2006, @09:32AM (#16851680)
    (http://lp.org/)
    Thank you slashdot for an article summary that decided for me that Ubuntu was wrong not to accept the artwork. Nevermind that it was canned becasue they were not pleased with the look of the artwork.


    The sad thing is that most people who read this will now side with the tone set in the summary (that Shuttlesworth is wrong and/or a bad person).

    Sometimes I think the folks who edit slashdot get a story and roll the dice to see if they are going to give it a positive or negitave slant, and then monitor their success rate of getting the larger part of the community to agree with them.

    I guess Ubuntu's success upset ./ so it is time we turn on them too in keeping with our underdog mentality, but last I checked OSTG no garage based effort either. Maybe it is time for ./ to turn on itself?

  • by NateTech (50881) on Wednesday November 15 2006, @11:47PM (#16864596)
    (