I’m happy that you’re stating this as a feeling and not as a fact, thanks. There were previous discussions on Discourse:
I’d argue that at least “drafting” was very much done in the open. From what I see in those threads summarizes to the following:
- Nobody gave feedback for the icon part of it
- Regarding color, most people wanted the reddish-color as it’s “as close as possible” to the previous logo
Now, that’s the reason why the icon is the same as in the draft, there apparently was no reason to change it. For the color, listening to the feedback was very much done and it was made even closer to the previous one (really hard to define that logo’s color as it has a gradient). Now, so far I’d say that was pretty open.
Coming to the alignment of Reps/mozilla. This is part of the overall branding guidelines, there was not much differentiation possible. Yes, it could be a more open and documented process there, that seems like a different can of worms to go into, as branding is not program-dependent but the whole organisation.
The decision to change the logo was made a long time ago, I didn’t see anybody speaking out against it in the drafting phase.
The finalizing didn’t leave a lot of options open, considering brand guidelines and the feedback there already was. I would love to hear what you would have done better or any suggestions for the future from your side. I heavily doubt an open vote or similar would have made remotely sense, due to the facts stated above. Happy to have you disagree with me though.