Warren Harris
After spending a bit of time trying to decide how to vote, I ended up deciding that my favorite would be a hybrid of several of the designs (#9 & #49 FalconNL, and #50 George Pollard). It's probably too late to include this in the voting, but here it is nonetheless:
That's quite nice, but the >>= lambda thing looks too busy to me. What surprises me is that none(?) of the candidates makes use of the "type" symbol. I'd like to see a version something like yours, but with :: instead of >>=/lambda ::Haskell means "of type Haskell", which is what we want people's programmes to be. Colour it interestingly and choose a good font and there you are. The interestingly coloured "::" on its own would make a reasonable choice for a badge (eg for a favicon). * * * semi-rant warning: This whole badge/logo business seems to me to be an excellent example of Parkinson's law of triviality (choosing the colour of the bikeshed). We have a large (too large) number of variations on relatively few themes and a really sophisticated voting system, but no very clear idea of what they're for and no explanation (such as my "of type Haskell" above) of why the candidates are the way they are. I didn't join in much to the earlier discussion because I thought things would work out to something sensible in the end, but it doesn't look like that happened. Work out what the problem is before putting the solution up for election! I agree that the current badge is horrid (it looks like something that rolled down a hill and collected some rubbish on the way), but in the absence of a reasoned replacement, the first step would simply be to get rid of it. Designing these things isn't trivial, and while many of the candidates are quite good pieces of art, a badge needs to be more than that. Not that professional designers do better in general; only a few of them are any good at it -- the rest rely on most people not knowing pretty from appropriate and just rake in the cash. -- Jón Fairbairn Jon.Fairbairn@cl.cam.ac.uk