Re: Don't mess with our brand [Was: 'GNOME', 'Gnome']

["Elijah Newren" <newren gmail com>]

On 4/27/06, Jeff Waugh <jdub perkypants org> wrote:
> <quote who="Steve Frécinaux">
>
> > You missed the point. As someone said previously, IBM is 3 letters long.
> > GNOME/Gnome is 5. But beside the case thing, is the acronym really still
> > relevant ?

It never really was. 
http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-doc-list/2000-October/msg00019.html

> Not wildly - but our current use of the brand is *very* relevant, and it
> keeps at least some of the association with garden gnomes out of the way.

If that were so important, then I believe the choice of 'GNOME' for
the project name would have been an utter failure.  ;-)  Besides,
until I can see proof otherwise, I think GNOME was merely a backronym
and that therefore the connection was intentional.  Miguel?

:-)

> We would have to actively change the brand for 'Gnome' to be correct, so I
> find it very disappointing that some people within the project are actively
> muddying the waters on this issue. (Not Alan - he's just being noisy.)

Nah, I was just being noisy too.  But I find it really odd that you'd
call it muddying the waters.  As if the waters were ever clear...
http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-doc-list/2000-January/msg00039.html
http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-doc-list/2000-October/msg00019.html

But, I'm kind of bored of the topic now, and I fully intend to just
wait for Miguel or someone else to try to push for renaming
(again[1]?).  I'm not going to bother; I'll just make sure to spell it
correctly myself (unless I ever have to do anything official) and
mostly ignore it when others spell it WRONG.  ;-)


Cheers,
Elijah

[1] http://mail.gnome.org/archives/foundation-list/2004-November/msg00057.html,
see answer to question 8.