Re: Public concerns over new W3C logo

Chris mentioned
> For what it's worth, I too have seen far more negative comments (or
"meh") than positive ones.  I would feel more comfortable with an equitable
collection of data points than what Tantek suggests, but I do think it's
worth introspection that attempts to avoid confirmation bias (in both
directions).

I want to remind everyone that people are more likely to share when they
don't like something than when they do due to negativity bias
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negativity_bias> and will likely impact any
data collected, especially data collected outside the controls of a survey.

I'm indifferent to the new logo but I'm curious, does the community feel
like the new logo and branding prevents the W3C from accomplishing our
strategic
goals <https://www.w3.org/mission/#strategy>?

Kindly,
Lola Odelola
Web Standards Technologist
lolaslab.co
I’m based in the UK & typically work UK hours.

On Tue, 21 Oct 2025 at 18:46, Sue Koomen <Sue.Koomen@aexp.com> wrote:

> Don, I agree with your statement:
>
>
>
> *“As a baseline for any future refinement possibilities, the PR team might
> consider starting with something "new" like the surrounding "W-W-W-C-"
> circle plus historic W3C logo in the center”*
>
>
>
> Sue
>
>
>
> *From:* Don Brutzman <don.brutzman@gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 21, 2025 10:31 AM
> *To:* Chris Wilson <cwilso@google.com>; Wendy Reid <wendyreid@fastmail.com>;
> Tantek Ç. <tantek@mozilla.com>; w3c-ac-forum <w3c-ac-forum@w3.org>
> *Cc:* www-archive@w3.org
> *Subject:* Re: Public concerns over new W3C logo
>
>
>
> First, sincere thanks in every direction for much good work.  Such
> rebranding efforts are always challenging and worthwhile, despite all
> difficulties.
>
>
>
> In the spirit of long-term shared improvement, here are some thoughts
> regarding the new logo.
>
>
>
> Logo observations:
>
>    - The circular ring around the logo spelling out "World Wide Web
>    Consortium" is distinctive and excellent, great first impression, looks
>    very professional.
>    - Similar kudos for superlative overall design and useful variations
>    found at Logos and icons <https://www.w3.org/policies/logos/> page.
>    - The interior logo pattern remains fairly inscrutable, requires lots
>    of mental effort with no clear recognition resulting from the squiggle
>    pattern... thus not memorable.
>    - Subjective confirmation of obscurity:  I don't yet know how to
>    verbally describe the logo pattern to others in a manner that they will
>    recognize.   "Stylized W3 symbol" perhaps?  Secondary confirmation:  uhh,
>    not yet sure how to draw it for others either.
>
> Process  observations:
>
>    - Likely I missed it, and apologies if so, but apparently the final
>    logo did not seem to receive much scrutiny from AC...  I remember getting
>    the pre-release announcement but not seeing logo itself...  perhaps a trial
>    rollout (such as pilot-project usage or member-meeting theming) might have
>    been helpful.
>    - The AC can be a trusted part of final stages for any future design
>    review and would no doubt identify reactions such as those raised
>    publicly.  Probably a good parallel to community grappling.
>    - Every other part of the rollout was thoughtful and totally
>    professional, demonstrating the consistently superlative qualities of W3C
>    efforts.
>
> Presumably there are multiple alternatives available from recent
> logo-redesign efforts.  As a baseline for any future refinement
> possibilities, the PR team might consider starting with something "new"
> like the surrounding "W-W-W-C-" circle plus historic W3C logo in the
> center... any new alternative logos ought to be at least that recognizable
> to the casual observer.
>
>
>
> Suggested metric for successful logo-image improvement, worth adapting
> from our X3D Graphics Scene Authoring Hints
> <https://www.web3d.org/x3d/content/examples/X3dSceneAuthoringHints.html#NamingConventions>
> :
>
>    -
> *"Success Metric: when is a name successful? (Ironic)  Answer: when no one
>    has to discuss that name any more, it is simply understood."*
>
>
>    - substitute "logo" above, *s/name/logo/*
>
> Am not advocating sudden logo change, or second-guessing diligent and
> professional group decisions here... simply offering some reactions.
>
>
>
> Hope this helps.  Again thanks for worthy efforts.
>
>
>
> all the best, Don
>
> --
>
> Web3D Consortium Advisory Committee (AC) Representative
>
> X3D Graphics, Maritime Robotics, Distributed Simulation
>
> Relative Motion Consulting  https://RelativeMotion.info
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 21, 2025 at 7:55 AM Chris Wilson <cwilso@google.com> wrote:
>
> Firmly taking off several hats:  I am not representing the Board nor
> Google in this particular instance, merely a long-term community member.
>
>
>
> I'd like to de-escalate the tone from "personal vendetta".  For what it's
> worth, I too have seen far more negative comments (or "meh") than positive
> ones.  I would feel more comfortable with an equitable collection of data
> points than what Tantek suggests, but I do think it's worth introspection
> that attempts to avoid confirmation bias (in both directions).  I don't
> expect anything to change with this rebrand at this point, of course.
>
>
>
> Wendy, you identified the exact problem that a significant part of the W3C
> community has had with this rebranding: there was an emotional attachment
> to the old brand, and the community did not call for the erasure of that
> identity.  I've been on record since I first saw the new logo as not being
> a fan (I'm sophomoric enough to not be able to unsee the visual
> associations), but I can understand why others might like it.  My primary
> concern was always that it represented a clear and complete break from the
> previous branding and identity. The emotional cost to the community seemed
> unnecessary.
>
>
>
> I have to disagree that the Team had "many rounds of consultation and even
> delayed things to address comments."  In the initial presentation, it was
> made clear that the Team was not asking for consultation, merely support,
> and I don't see that any changes were made to address comments.  I do hope
> that when there is an inevitable future rebranding, the community is more
> involved from the beginning.
>
>
>
> -Chris
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 21, 2025 at 6:52 AM Wendy Reid <wendyreid@fastmail.com> wrote:
>
> Tantek,
>
>
>
> Your personal vendetta against this logo started when it was first
> presented to the AB early this year, and does not seem to have subsided. I
> understand you don’t like it, that is perfectly ok, not everyone needs to
> like everything.
>
>
>
> The points you raise here are the same ones we spent far too long debating
> earlier this year. Choosing to focus on some negative responses on socials
> is confirmation bias. There were many positive ones too, I note those
> aren’t part of your analysis.
>
>
>
> When change happens, especially in branding, there is always an inevitable
> divide in reactions. Some people like a thing immediately, some hate it,
> most are ambivalent. The W3C logo was the same for a long time, emotional
> attachment, or at least comfort, are inevitable. For what it’s worth, I
> really like it, I’m sure others do too.
>
>
>
> What I do want to call out here is how disrespectful and disappointing
> this approach is. The Team worked hard to make this happen, they had many
> rounds of consultation and even delayed things to address comments. At this
> point, you are just mad they didn’t listen to you, and I think you need to
> take a hard look at yourself to question why you felt this was a good use
> of your time and efforts. It’s clear you care about the community, but
> choosing to publicly and repeatedly undermine the work of the Team is not
> the kind of behaviour I think appropriate for a member of the AC. It is not
> the AC vs the Team, we are all in this together.
>
>
>
> Have some faith in the people we work with everyday.
>
>
>
> -Wendy
>
>
>
> On Oct 21, 2025, at 1:25 AM, Tantek Ç. <tantek@mozilla.com> wrote:
>
> 
>
> Dear AC:
>
>
>
> Summary: The new W3C logo has generated non-trivial public negative
> feedback and reactions that are both concerning and may merit action. This
> email summarizes the patterns I have seen so far. If you are also a
> concerned Member who has, or has heard, negative feedback, please feel free
> to email me directly.
>
>
>
> The intent of this thread is to document negative public reactions. Please
> only reply if you have more negative public reactions to add, with new
> public citations (URLs). If you want to make a different sort of comment
> please start a new email thread (with new subject) accordingly.
>
>
>
> Negative public reactions to the new W3C logo fall into the following
> categories (in order of instances found so far):
>
>
>
>    1. (17) genitalia
>    2. (7) excrement
>    3. (6) unclear, unreadable, illegible, confusing, or distracting
>    4. (3) body parts (other than genitalia, or in general)
>    5. (2) coat hanger
>    6. (2) obscenity, perversion, or vulgarity
>
>
>
> I believe these public concerns are of broader public W3C community
> interest so I have cc’d www-archive for the record.
>
>
>
> Sources of negative feedback:
>
>    - Replies to the W3C.social post:
>    https://w3c.social/@w3c/115299385112878605
>    - #W3C hashtag: https://mastodon.social/tags/w3c
>    - Reddit posts:
>    https://www.reddit.com/r/web_design/comments/1o6kl2k/w3c_logo_refresh/
>
> https://www.reddit.com/r/webdev/comments/1o6kled/w3c_logo_refresh/
>
>    - Hackernews post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45578265
>    - Other posts folks shared with me and their replies.
>
>
>
> For reference, many of us brought up concerns like these and others in
> feedback in meetings this past March:
>
>    - https://www.w3.org/2025/03/13-2025logo-minutes.html
>    - https://www.w3.org/2025/03/18-ac-minutes.html
>
>
>
> What I am not looking for:
>
>    - Tone-policing. If the discussion of this issue offends you, please
>    do not reply.
>    - Rationalizations. If you feel like defending the new W3C logo, this
>    is the wrong thread for that. This thread is for gathering public critical
>    citations.
>
>
>
> What I am looking for:
>
>    - If you are an AC Representative (or Alternate) and have similar
>    concerns, or have received similar feedback from your organization
>    internally, please get in touch with me.
>    - Public citations (URLs) of additional negative public reactions.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Tantek Çelik
>
> Mozilla AC Representative
>
>
>
> =====
>
>
>
> Citations of specific public reactions:
>
>
>
> =====
>
>
>
> CONTENT WARNING:
>
>
>
> The following may include (partial) text quotes which may have language or
> links to images that some may consider offensive.
>
>
>
> If you are offended by such words or images, please skip the rest of this
> email and do not click on the links provided.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Dates/times are PDT. The letters in parentheses indicate the first letter
> of the post’s category/categories, e.g. (b) for “body parts”.
>
>
>
> 2025-09-26:
>
>    - 04:38 (g): https://mastodon.social/@mariejulien/115269925623809543
>    (paraphrased translation: “does not pass my famously rigorous ‘cock or
>    swastika’ test)
>    - 04:39 (b): https://oisaur.com/@kgaut/115269930983516661 (translated:
>    “it even has a pair of buttocks”)
>    - 05:21 (g): https://framapiaf.org/@monviolon/115270097219045974
>    (cropped subset of logo)
>
>
>
> 2025-10-01:
>
>    - 08:00 (c): https://mastodon.ie/@rotan/115299504262096954
>    - 08:01 (g): https://mastodon.social/@mariejulien/115299494586267687
>    - 08:21 (g): https://mastodon.social/@mariejulien/115299585913099113
>    - 08:24 (g): https://indieweb.social/@jgarber/115299600896573084
>    - 08:52 (g): https://circumstances.run/@davidgerard/115299709910319727
>    - 08:59 (g): https://a11y.social/@mikemccaffrey/115302095326319054
>    - 09:10 (e): https://mastodon.social/@nicofrand/115299779347599598
>    - 10:28 (e): https://mastodon.social/@davecykl/115300086586476170
>    - 17:55 (u): https://mamot.fr/@bohwaz/115301843996549479
>    - 18:59 (g): https://a11y.social/@mikemccaffrey/115302095326319054
>    - 19:46 (g): https://c.im/@cwilcox808/115302279843647978
>
>
>
> 2025-10-02:
>
>    - 04:50 (u): https://maly.io/@danielmunoz/115304420857752511
>    - 04:52 (o):
>    https://circumstances.run/@hipsterelectron/115304428218503093
>    - 07:40 (g): https://social.unextro.net/@ondra/115305075794112412
>    - 07:42 (g): https://mastodon.social/@tojiro/115305098273087104
>    - 08:02 (e): https://eliitin-some.fi/@henrik/115305175046397749
>    - 10:42 (g): https://mastodon.gamedev.place/@aras/115305805942851640
>    - 20:04 (b): https://front-end.social/@leaverou/115308015280324416
>    - (o) https://nyan.lol/@zicklepop/115305222213744940 (deleted)
>
>
>    - “@w3c@w3c.social perverts”
>
>
>
> 2025-10-14
>
>    - 03:09 (u):
>    https://www.reddit.com/r/webdev/comments/1o6kled/comment/njivht3/
>    - 03:52 (e): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45578474
>    - 03:56 (g): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45578501
>    - 09:46 (u):
>    https://www.reddit.com/r/webdev/comments/1o6kled/comment/njh3hpu/
>    - 11:25 (c):
>    https://www.reddit.com/r/web_design/comments/1o6kl2k/comment/njhnqtk/
>    - 13:18 (e):
>    https://www.reddit.com/r/web_design/comments/1o6kl2k/comment/njia9iz/
>    - 16:31 (eg):
>    https://www.reddit.com/r/web_design/comments/1o6kl2k/comment/njj9ad3/
>
>
>
> 2025-10-15
>
>    - 00:14 (e):
>    https://www.reddit.com/r/webdev/comments/1o6kled/comment/njl0n9t/
>
>
>
> 2025-10-16
>
>    - 01:07 (b):
>    https://www.reddit.com/r/webdev/comments/1o6kled/comment/njur9s1/
>
>
>
> 2025-10-17
>
>    - (u):
>    https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7384866217804873729/?commentUrn=urn%3Ali%3Acomment%3A%28activity%3A7384866217804873729%2C7384901225135390720%29&dashCommentUrn=urn%3Ali%3Afsd_comment%3A%287384901225135390720%2Curn%3Ali%3Aactivity%3A7384866217804873729%29
>    <https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7384866217804873729/?commentUrn=urn%3Ali%3Acomment%3A%28activity%3A7384866217804873729%2C7384901225135390720%29&amp;dashCommentUrn=urn%3Ali%3Afsd_comment%3A%287384901225135390720%2Curn%3Ali%3Aactivity%3A7384866217804873729%29>
>
>
>
>
> 2025-10-20
>
>    - 11:18 (g): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45647233
>    - 13:14 (u): https://indieweb.social/@zerojames/115408325645554816
>    - 13:15 (g): https://mastodon.social/@vanderwal/115408326479382068
>    - 13:18 (g): https://indieweb.social/@johanna/115408340828293280
>
>
>
> =====
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *American Express made the following annotations This message and any
> attachments are solely for the intended recipient and may contain
> confidential or privileged information. If you are not the intended
> recipient, any disclosure, copying, use, or distribution of the information
> included in this message and any attachments is prohibited. If you have
> received this communication in error, please notify us by reply e-mail and
> immediately and permanently delete this message and any attachments.
> American Express Prospective and Existing Customers: For more information
> about how we protect your privacy, please visit
> www.americanexpress.com/privacy <http://www.americanexpress.com/privacy>.
> If you are located outside the U.S., please select your location at
> www.americanexpress.com/change-country/
> <http://www.americanexpress.com/change-country/> and access the privacy
> link at the bottom of the page. American Express a ajouté le commentaire
> suivant Ce courrier et toute pièce jointe qu'il contient sont réservés au
> seul destinataire indiqué et peuvent contenir des renseignements
> confidentiels et protégés par le secret professionnel. Si vous n'êtes pas
> le destinataire prévu, toute divulgation, duplication, utilisation ou
> distribution du courrier ou de toute pièce jointe est interdite. Si vous
> avez reçu cette communication par erreur, veuillez nous en aviser par
> courrier et détruire immédiatement le courrier et les pièces jointes.
> Clients et prospects d'American Express: Pour plus d'informations sur la
> façon dont nous protégeons votre vie privée, veuillez visiter
> www.americanexpress.com/privacy <http://www.americanexpress.com/privacy>.
> Si vous êtes situé à l'extérieur des États-Unis, veuillez sélectionner
> votre emplacement à l'adresse www.americanexpress.com/change-country/
> <http://www.americanexpress.com/change-country/> et accéder au lien de
> confidentialité en bas de la page.*
>