Home

Previous | Next

OK then, that Olypics thing.

  • Jun. 4th, 2007 at 5:27 PM
Bitchcakes
I think this damned thing has spread across my friends page today faster than last weeks LJ wank, so in order to settle the ongoing debate, I have decided to apply science to the problem.

Poll #996934 The new olympics 'brand' is
Open to: All, detailed results viewable to: All

Check boses, y'know, that means you can tick more than one.

View Answers

the message that London 2012 will be "Everyone's Games".
0 (0.0%)

A disfigured swastika
20 (35.1%)

Lisa Simpson giving head
29 (50.9%)

Terrible
33 (57.9%)

A blatent Madness rip-off
6 (10.5%)

A Designer's Republic rip-off
5 (8.8%)

A great big joked designed by the owners of an awful website
16 (28.1%)

A cubist depiction of oral
27 (47.4%)

A perfectly valid logo for a massive global event that we're already bored hearing about
7 (12.3%)

A snowflake
4 (7.0%)

[info]guido_was_taken
8 (14.0%)

Something else I'll suggest in the comments
2 (3.5%)


Um, yeah. There's a petition, I haven't signed it as I really couldn't care less, but if you do, feel free.

[info]mapp has the best of the BBC's alternative submissions. ETA: Oh, and [info]anw's entry linked above got metaquoted as well. Also? No comment notifications. At all. Not ignoring you, honest.

ETA 2: Via Duncan, they have a video. Does that help understand it and make it work better for anyone? No, thought not.

Comments

( Comment )
[info]matgb wrote:
Jun. 4th, 2007 04:39 pm (UTC)
And yes, before everyone starts, I know it's full of typos and spelling errors. I did proof read, honest. Ah well.
[info]miss_s_b wrote:
Jun. 4th, 2007 04:58 pm (UTC)
And the code, too...

* smooch *

You ever get tested for dyslexia? You can grants, you know! Free money!
[info]matgb wrote:
Jun. 4th, 2007 05:34 pm (UTC)
Bah; typos, that's all they were. Although free money is good, my spelling is normally far too good to indicate any LDs in that direction.
[info]miss_s_b wrote:
Jun. 4th, 2007 06:32 pm (UTC)
Now, you KNOW what happens when you use that icon...

* drags you off for a good spanking until you see the error of your ways *
[info]matgb wrote:
Jun. 4th, 2007 07:57 pm (UTC)
Mmmm
[info]rho wrote:
Jun. 4th, 2007 04:43 pm (UTC)
It is inane, naff, pathetic, terrible, and probably cost the GDP of a small sub-Saharan African country in fees to overpaid design consultants.

In short, it is exactly what I'd expect of such a thing.
[info]matgb wrote:
Jun. 4th, 2007 05:39 pm (UTC)
Pretty much.

*kicks LJ and hopes for notifications to switch back on*
[info]innerbrat wrote:
Jun. 4th, 2007 07:29 pm (UTC)
It is inane, naff, pathetic, terrible, and probably cost the GDP of a small sub-Saharan African country in fees to overpaid design consultants.

I can only echo what I said further down. It's perfect for 'modern London'.
[info]pinkshifter wrote:
Jun. 4th, 2007 04:46 pm (UTC)
This was what I put on [info]philipstorry's lj earlier - after he pointed out that it just needed Timmy Mallet to complete the 80's naffness

"aaaaah maybe it's a modern interpretation of Timmy's mallet having been attacked with a flamethrower and lying in a puddle of pinky yellow molten foam"
[info]miss_s_b wrote:
Jun. 4th, 2007 04:58 pm (UTC)
Oh GOD. You HAD to mention Timmy frigging Mallet, didn't you?

* tries not to think of that single he had that got to number one *
[info]faeriecween wrote:
Jun. 4th, 2007 05:07 pm (UTC)
"she wore an itsy bitsy.."

Am I helping?
*innocent look*
[info]miss_s_b wrote:
Jun. 4th, 2007 05:12 pm (UTC)
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGH!!!!
[info]faeriecween wrote:
Jun. 4th, 2007 05:13 pm (UTC)
Sorry it was my de-nervifying entertainment.
Besides which you merely mentioning it has got the damn thing stuck in my head!!!!

[info]matgb wrote:
Jun. 4th, 2007 05:39 pm (UTC)
You? Innocent? Pah!
[info]faeriecween wrote:
Jun. 4th, 2007 05:42 pm (UTC)
Aaaaaaaaaaallllways!!!
[info]draich_goch wrote:
Jun. 4th, 2007 05:16 pm (UTC)
Just for you, so you know I care! hehehe

ENJOY!
[info]faeriecween wrote:
Jun. 4th, 2007 05:22 pm (UTC)
My turn to go Aaargh!! I can't believe I clickefd that link!
[info]draich_goch wrote:
Jun. 4th, 2007 05:24 pm (UTC)
hehehe. My work here is complete
[info]matgb wrote:
Jun. 4th, 2007 05:53 pm (UTC)
Well done sir!

Pass on my regards to the old farts.
[info]draich_goch wrote:
Jun. 5th, 2007 12:35 am (UTC)
Did so, although most of them will have forgotten who you are by now. ;-)
[info]matgb wrote:
Jun. 4th, 2007 05:43 pm (UTC)
Flashblock. It's the answer to everything. OK, my answer to some things.
[info]faeriecween wrote:
Jun. 4th, 2007 06:13 pm (UTC)
but then it just shows me the little f and I have to click it as my curiosity knows no bounds ...


bring it on myself. I know.
[info]miss_s_b wrote:
Jun. 4th, 2007 06:34 pm (UTC)
Ahahahahahahahahaha I had more sense than THAT!
[info]draich_goch wrote:
Jun. 5th, 2007 12:44 am (UTC)
Damn. (note to self - must try harder)
[info]pinkshifter wrote:
Jun. 4th, 2007 07:13 pm (UTC)
Funnily enough I saw the album he did for £1 in a charity shop a few weeks ago - when I went in the other day it had gone. So someone somewhere has listened to that recently. Even I wouldn't stoop that low and I'll listen to almost anything.
[info]miss_s_b wrote:
Jun. 4th, 2007 07:17 pm (UTC)
If ever proof were needed that there are some sick, sick bastards in this world...
[info]pinkshifter wrote:
Jun. 4th, 2007 07:22 pm (UTC)
I hear you on that score - and I didn't even buy it to give to some unspecting friend.
[info]eldar wrote:
Jun. 4th, 2007 04:58 pm (UTC)
I don't think any other word than "terrible" is required to describe it.
[info]matgb wrote:
Jun. 4th, 2007 06:03 pm (UTC)
Well, no, terrible is perfectly adequate a description. But some of the others are more fun.

Besides, if they keep the thing, think of all the fun you can have pointing out how obscene it is when it's on display publicly.
[info]paulgregory wrote:
Jun. 4th, 2007 05:13 pm (UTC)
I echo the 80s kids TV comments. I fully expected the video on the website to fade into a studio full of screaming children and a bunch of zany adults off their tits on coffee. I'm sure that if you dubbed the theme to Saturday Superstore or Going Live over the top and tightened the pace up a bit, it would work perfectly.

What really disgusts me is that they've shunted the existing website (ie the one about the Games) over to main.london2012.com while www.london2012.com just blithers on about the brand. Ridiculous from an SEO standpoint.
[info]matgb wrote:
Jun. 4th, 2007 06:00 pm (UTC)
Yeah, that's really stupid. I wonder if any 'design' type will ever understand the benefits of building your search presence in a coherent way?

Wait, don't answer that one. Their blog is OK though; built by one of my LJ friends and his team.
[info]susumu wrote:
Jun. 4th, 2007 09:32 pm (UTC)
I'm really glad we don't maintain that site any more.
[info]matgb wrote:
Jun. 5th, 2007 07:13 am (UTC)
Yeah, I think complete dissasociation from that design mess is a good thing, they'll want that logo all over the blog as well now.

Do like matt's version though, makes it a bit too obvious but still.
[info]innerbrat wrote:
Jun. 4th, 2007 07:14 pm (UTC)
It's supposed to represent London for the new millennium, capture the spirit of the city and so on.

So the fact that it looks like an ugly, crass badly done piece of vandalism seems to work OK.
[info]matgb wrote:
Jun. 4th, 2007 07:26 pm (UTC)
Yeah, it does seem to sum up our rulers approach to things when you put it like that...
[info]paulatpingu wrote:
Jun. 4th, 2007 07:47 pm (UTC)
It's a joke. It has to be a joke. It's like how Nintendo jokingly called the Revolution the 'Wii', but this time they have to admit it was a joke and come up with something else.

Right?

I mean, sod trying to figure out what it is - has anyone seen a post with someone saying they're perfectly happy with it the way it is? That wasn't a politician or on the payroll? Or bat-shit crazy?

Thought not. (Until somebody proves me wrong anyway...)
[info]matgb wrote:
Jun. 4th, 2007 08:19 pm (UTC)
I dread to look. It's possible, but I doubt it somewhere. And yeah, Jennie has an interesting source for the idea.
[info]davegodfrey wrote:
Jun. 4th, 2007 08:36 pm (UTC)
Why did they need to replace the one for the "let's get the olympics" campaign? It had the thames, and the colours, and the year and location in case anyone forgot. Instead of which we get soemthing Picasso would have drawn during an all night cocaine-and-absinthe bender.
[info]matgb wrote:
Jun. 5th, 2007 07:19 am (UTC)
soemthing Picasso would have drawn during an all night cocaine-and-absinthe bender

Brilliant, yes, agreed.

As to why replace it? No idea, makes no sense at all. Except they had £400K to burn.
[info]tyrell wrote:
Jun. 5th, 2007 11:12 am (UTC)
Wow, that's appalling.

It took about 24 hours before I realised it said "2012". I'm with the ruder interpretations, definitely.

Did they ask even one member of the public? Completely rubbish.
( Comment )

Introspection

I'm Mat Bowles, a Devonshire lad displaced to Yorkshire. I'm a part-time analyst, marketer and website manage, although mostly I'm a house-husband.

Wikio - Top BlogsThis is my personal general interest journal where I write about or link to whatever I've fond that amused, intrigued or enraged me at the time. I'm a committed liberal, equalist and atheist, but I really like it when people can demonstrate I'm wrong, and have close friends with whom I completely disagree on some if not all of those points.

Coalition For Choice

There probably ought to be a Creative Commons licence in here somewhere but in the meantime consider this permission to quote me (link) & link to what I write.

If you decide to keep reading, please do say hello, let me know where you found me from, etc. I promise not to bite (well, unless you want me to...)

Latest Month

June 2009
S M T W T F S
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
282930    
Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by [info]matgb

Livejournal stuff (ignore)