[ubuntu-art] Reversion to Dapper Artwork

[Toby Smithe]

After this message, I am going to end my part in this discussion. I feel
I have adequately shown my points, and people know how I feel (and how
very strongly I feel it).

On Thu, 2006-10-12 at 20:12 +0100, m c wrote:
> On 10/12/06, Toby Smithe <toby.smithe at gmail.com> wrote:
> [snip]
> >
> > You may understand, but there's obviously no point in trying to sway the
> > decision. This community-driven distribution (Debian based, is it not?),
> > is completely and utterly totalitarian. I thought the term "dictator"
> > was benevolent! Obviously the merit of the old artwork set has not won
> > the -"ocracy". Or was it ever this way?
> 
> There are a number of situations where having someone in charge who is
> able to make a final decision is a good thing, certainly artwork where
> everyone has an opinion is a case of this, and such lack of central
> power has often been seen as Debian's (for example) biggest
> weaknesses.

I understand, and I'm not going to argue. Just look at the failures of
communism around the world throughout history.

> 
> > Why should the decision of a small set of people (the few people with
> > power) mean a recession for a much larger set. The survey on the Ubuntu
> > Forums was obviously a larger set than those making the decision, and so
> > set sizes can be discounted when talking in terms of opinion, as it is
> > obvious that the majority of people do not agree with the choice. I'm
> > very sorry to see it has come to that. Perhaps I won't congratulate the
> > team on release date, as I promised myself I would do, for bringing to
> > us such a wonderful distribution. This is not the Art team's fault, in
> > any way.
> 
> The decision is ultimately Mark's, and I am happy for him to take it
> in whatever way he sees fit as long as he has listened to and thought
> about rationally argued opposite arguments and suggestions from the
> community, which i believe he has done. Whether this undermines the
> community spirit of Ubuntu is again an issue I'm sure Mark doesn't
> take lightly. (Of course he is still wrong :p)

http://www.ubuntu.com/community/processes/governance?highlight=%
28meritocracy%29

It is ultimately Mark's, but the Art Team should have at least some
worth, otherwise it is effectively useless (as it has been for Edgy).
However, I'm sure that Mark didn't want it to come to this either.

> >This was Edgy, was it not? So far, as has been previously
> > mentioned, only one of the initial goals (when looking at the original
> > announcement) has been met. And I have seen sabdfl's blog post on the
> > announcement...
> 
> Those were not really the initial goals for Edgy, but examples the
> sabd was citing as reflecting the overall vision and possible ways
> forward. A large number of revolutionary (30 year of linux history!),
> funky and *shiny* new features have been put in. My point was merely
> that many of these are not visible to the end user, so there is a
> difference in appearances and expectations in the minds of many users,
> which not chaning the artwork certainly doesn't help.

I understand that. The goals were outlined at the UDS, and in the
Launchpad specs. However, fewer people will read the specs than the
official announcement, and I hate disappointment.