Skip to main content


Which do you prefer?

[ 12 ] (44.4%)
[ 1 ] (3.7%)
[ 6 ] (22.2%)
[ 8 ] (29.6%)

Total Members Voted: 16

Voting closed: 2014-02-02, 15:57:14

Topic: Logo (Read 22624 times)

Re: Logo

Reply #50
The favicon looks pretty much like the original.

Shouldn't the favicon and the site logo be the same? May I suggest the logo be like the favicon, but with a round white background, so as to stand out from the rest of the site's colours? So that when you change the theme colours of the site (I understood this was going to be a user option at some point), it won't affect the logo.


Reply #51
I like it as it is now.
At least it is the only green on the entire site for now (let alone the "website" icons).

Re: Logo

Reply #52

Re: Logo

Reply #53

Nice work krake :D I'd be happy with any of them.

Thanks :)
In any case the hard work is to create a logo :)
I like all of them. It was a hard choice to select one of them.

I agree that the colour balance has shifted a bit, although given the current background colour the white does ensure the logo stands out nicely.

I like them (logo & favicon) as they are now!
Nice work :)

Re: Logo

Reply #55
I guess it can be considered a problem:

Browsers don't display the website logo in RSS view

Re: Logo

Reply #56
I'm not sure that's a problem, but could you explain that a bit more?

Re: Logo

Reply #57
Specifically, the little icon that is supposed to be beside the URL in the address bar. When you open up the RSS view, not yet subscribed, the logo is not there in Seamonkey, no tab icon either. If it's there in FF, then you're right: No problem, because nobody uses Seamonkey.