I don't feel no vibes.

That said, I do agree that it's better to ask the individual (but not some Grand Typophile Council) if it's OK before doing it.

hhp

What about an icon or a word that indicates whether it is ok to post your own versions? Or a note in the "start new thread" window? I don't have a problem with it myself.

kris.

I think that would be perfectly legit and welcome (at least for me) for other people to remix my samples to show what they'd do. How is that any different than making a suggestion?

Memoirs of a rehabilitated sketcher:

I think there's actually quite a bit of difference. Verbal suggestions are clearly supportive

personaly i don't see how a visual/graphic critique is any different from a written/verbal one. in any case a critique is just a suggestion which one is free to accept or reject. everyone has opinions and insight to offer, not all you will agree with. making final decisions allows the person whose work is being critiqued to "own" their design (at least that would work for me emotionaly) for example, if someone recommends a certain typeface for a project and someone else says the same face would be a bad idea, i have to come to the final conclusion of whether to use it or not. the final decision is mine, my own. i always appreciate any comments, critique that anyone on here has to offer and take them all with a grain of salt... from what i've experienced here we're all capbable of playing nice and if the person whose work is being critiqued doesn't want certain types of suggestions, they can always request that they not be made, but then what's the purpose of the critique?

One complication is crediting. If you use a logo that's due in large part to the contributions of certain individuals (or Typophile in general) where/how do you give proper credit?

hhp

i'd think a simple "thanks, that's a great idea" posted here would be enuff credit for me.

I think there's more value in manipulating the curve of a letter to match a verbal suggestion, tweaking it until you think it's right, than simply changing your work to match the sample of someone who suggested an improvement.

Randy Jones does a great job on his critiques. He uses sketching to point out areas that could be improved, and offers general direction on how to do it. But he doesn't redraw characters (or logos or...) for anyone.

I've offered visuals as examples, so I'm 'guilty' in this case. Offering professional help means opening yourself up to giving away what you normally get paid for. It may be 'bad form' to do it here, but how often do you sketch something for a colleague at your office rather than verbally articulate it because it's just easier? It's the difference between a quick sketch (digital or otherwise) and a fully refined 'suggestion'.

We're visual, so it makes sense that this happens.

But, I see how it gets out of control sometimes. I agree that an icon/ standard invitation to sketch will probably diffuse the issue.

As they say in english: My bid for the presidency has been grounded after it was leaked that I dodged the draft by being born in 1977. I think America was just not ready for a platform centered around fake smallcap reform. I am grateful for the support of the typographic lobby and bezier monkey's union.

------------

Stephen, the faceless applauder looks suddenly sinister next to a comment like that.

Randy you mean Stephen IS big brother?

Being that we are all visual, it is often easier (I'm guilty) to take what someone has posted and manipulate it until it is what we think it should be. However, from a teacher's point of view, I can also see how this is not the most direct path to learning on the part of the student. That said, I agree with Kris' idea of an icon. That way no one has to ask offline (although this is good) ... and we can all play with one another nicely.

Randy Jones is my hero.

Randy for president. I love that guy.

As they say in French: "Ce qui se con

Hoorah for 1977!