Subject: New Website

I guess I’m ok with that since the overall site is such a huge improvement but please don’t go back to the old logo for the launch, the color schemes don’t match and that will ruin the effect of the new design. If you ask startbootstrap I bet they agree.

Ship it, there will be lots of changes later, if only content updates.

On Dec 13, 2017, at 12:38 PM, Andrew Palumbo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

I apologize.. I've been in a back to back meetings all week.. so am hectic..but as far as separating the vote, my thinking is just ship site as is and then swap out logo if we have -1s on it.

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE smartphone
-------- Original message --------
From: Andrew Palumbo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 12/13/2017 12:35 (GMT-08:00)
Subject: RE: New Website

I am +1 on the site absolutely.  I suggest that we seperate the vote  on the logo and the site.
Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE smartphone
-------- Original message --------
From: Pat Ferrel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 12/13/2017 09:47 (GMT-08:00)
Subject: Re: New Website

Due to 8 years of Ruby cruft I can’t get the Jeckyll site running without some major jackhammering. I can’t post a screenshot but here is the proposed logo. <>

I encourage people to look at all of this and be judicious with -1s. This has been a lot of work, much of the design volunteered by folks at IMO the design is awesome. It will put a good, modern, clean face on the new Mahout.

The logo is a simple cube, not my favorite but I’m not going to -1 my favorite was the M/infinity symbol. If the logo is meant to be a hypercube there are simple ways to illustrate it like some form of this: <>
On Dec 6, 2017, at 11:27 AM, Pat Ferrel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Since you’ve already built it can you share a screen shot? The mockup I saw on Slack looked awesome.

Also a logo change is a lot more far reaching so can we have at least a little discussion?
On Dec 6, 2017, at 10:18 AM, Andrew Musselman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

+1, looks great

On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 7:43 AM, Trevor Grant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>