[okfn-discuss] new brand, new website: coming up next week

[William Waites]

On Sun, Apr 13, 2014 at 07:20:46PM +0200, Daniel Dietrich wrote:

> I have not engaged in this discussion so far, for the simple reason,
> that I don’t finde the time for it …

Same here, but given the déluge of messages I had a look at the wiki
page. Here are some thoughts:

  - I like the new logo, it is much more striking and distinctive than
    the old one which looks like one of those pennies that you press
    in a machine at tourist attractions.

  - Throughout the author(s) of the page say things like, "for people
    who are new to Open," maybe it's just me but I think this nouning
    of adjectives is very jarring, far worse than using acronyms. It's
    classic newspeak.

  - Informally abbreviating Open Knowledge as OK, where there isn't
    room for confusion is fine. Actually it's a charmingly clever
    characteristic of the name. Forbidding that would be a loss.

  - I'm not sure I like the renaming. The organisation isn't Open
    Knowledge. Open Knowledge is Open Knowledge. If "Foundation" is
    problematic how about Open Knowledge Organisation or something
    like that?

  - I agree with the other comments that data might be too central in
    the rebranding. Particularly because data is not knowledge. Taking
    a longer term view, "data" is fasionable these past couple of
    years and will probably be for a few years more. In a decade, when
    we have all been successful at Open [1] and enough data is
    habitually made available that it isn't the central preoccupation,
    does the organisation cease to have a purpose? I don't think
    so. Today's Open Knowledge Foundation has a wider remit than just
    data. 

Best,
-w

[1] See? Isn't that jarring? Please don't do that.