Preserved Topic: FAQ icon - VOTE HERE! (Page 1 of 2)

VOTING CLOSES: 12-18-2002

Thanks to everyone for their submissions in our quest for a definitive FAQ icon.
After much ponderous deliberation, the juding panel have nominated the following icons for voting:

------------------------------------------

alfred

------------------------------------------


bradley

------------------------------------------


charles

------------------------------------------


duncan

------------------------------------------

These finalists were the only entries that received more than two nominations (not including any self-nominations) from our panel of five judges.

You'll also notice that i've taken the liberty of naming each entry, just to make the voting process that much more enjoyable.

Note that there may still be some tweaking to the final icon, so the above entries may not be the 100% final result, but are close enough.

I now request that all interested asylumnites vote for their personal favourite.
When doing so, please remember these basic rules:

1 - one vote only. i'm too lazy to devise a more intricate voting system, so each inmate is entitled to one vote per real world entity (not one vote per asylum account! )
2 - voting for yourself is fine. if you're one of the lucky finalists, feel free to vote for your own entry, if you think it's the best. no one's going to call you any names (that they haven't called you already).
3 - problems? comments? email me, or start a new thread. This thread is for VOTES ONLY. simply submit the name of the icon you are voting for, and that's it. no sigs either thanks.

edit - oh yeah... ummm..... voting, will, well, close... later. so vore now. come on, your country needs you.

[This message has been edited by reitsma (edited 12-13-2002).]

[This message has been edited by reitsma (edited 12-13-2002).]

[This message has been edited by reitsma (edited 12-18-2002).]

charles

bradley

charles

bradley

charles

[This message has been edited by Slime (edited 12-13-2002).]

bradley

post = post - sig


[This message has been edited by reitsma (edited 12-13-2002).]

charles

chuck

Come on, krets! You ruined the pattern!

Oh, um... Chas

bradley

CHARLES

Charles

Duncan.

[This message has been edited by njuice42 (edited 12-13-2002).]

Charlie

Duncan


-- Unoriginal Cell 693 --

who is charlie duncan?

duncan.

Charllie

[This message has been edited by Schitzoboy (edited 12-13-2002).]

Bradley

bradley

c

bradley

[This message has been edited by velvetrose (edited 12-16-2002).]

Duncan.

charles

charles

_________________________
"There are 10 kinds of people; those who know binary, those who don't and those who start counting at zero"

Alfred

{edit- yep, I changed my mind. seeing as voting isn't over, it seemd perfectly legal.}

[This message has been edited by DL-44 (edited 12-14-2002).]

Charles

You can't use Duncan - that phrase is trademarked by Radio Shack.

hmm?

I don't follow.
I don't see that mentioned anywhere in RadioShack's site.

Bradley.

Well, on the off chance that everyone from here on out votes on Duncan, we'll just change it to "You've got questions - We've got answers" (like one of the variations on that theme said... can't remember who did it). Surely they can't copyright grammatical variations of the sentence as well...

I don't know too much about copyright law, but it seems a tad ridiculous to me that we wouldn't be able to use a phrase in a graphic that is basically for private use and isn't going to earn us any money. Maybe that's the way the law works, but I think it's kind of silly. Then again, I'm kind of silly too.

[Edit: OK, the phrase is trademarked not copyrighted... I'm not sure what the difference is there...]

[Edit2: OK, before anyone starts going around calling me a ripper, the reason why I don't quite understand this is that the phrase in question is an everyday English phrase that does not intrinsically have anything to do with Radio Shack. In other words, it could conceivably be used in normal conversation without any reference to Radio Shack...]

[This message has been edited by Suho1004 (edited 12-13-2002).]

[This message has been edited by Suho1004 (edited 12-13-2002).]

Charles



[This message has been edited by CPrompt (edited 12-13-2002).]

Charles

duncan


__________________________
This is a sig virus. Due to programing errors he cannot spread. So please help him by copying him to your sig so he can spread.

As far as i know, text alone cannot be trademarked unless...


1. It is placed in a colour scheme which when used in conjunction with that text would lead someone to believe that your image was attributable to someone else.

2. Also it would have to be identically replicated in some form, ie font,style colouring in such a way that you would automatically associate it with a company

3.the onlyway i know that text can be protected is like this.

1.copyright or patent (pretty much the same thing when applied to text in law)

ie if i write a book and someone rehashed the idea using different text then thats gonna be a bitch to win, if however they just change a few words here and there, then that is plagerism/and could and probably would stand up in court, but IT WOULD have to be proven that the person copying it was trying to do one of the following.

1.copy material or idea for personal or financial gain
2.Make financial benefit from that act by alledging thrugh that portrayal of text that they were the original author.

just by merely placing words by a graphic would not count as illegal, unless one of the above scenarios was in fact true.

Bradley

[This message has been edited by Dufty (edited 12-13-2002).]

Charles - though it would be even cooler if it was more obvious that the thing is clickable. But I guess we can discuss this later when it has won

alfred

duncan

Chuckles