Talk:Main Page

Request for comment: Future of the BoD

 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 * Closing as successful per overwhelming consensus and self-admission of a good portion of the local bureaucrats that they should be demoted. From this moment on, this wiki no longer has bureaucrats so Stewards will assume the de facto role of bureaucrats while new ones are elected. This wiki is encouraged to first formulate and ratify administrator and bureaucrat policies first before starting any request for administrator or bureaucrat so as to prevent a future incident like this one and to indicate for future Stewards that any policy here is ratified by the community and cannot be violated. Agent Isai (talk) 04:09, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

In light of today's events, I've been asked by the stewards to establish a community consensus on whether to demote the remaining Board members and establish new leadership or leave as-is. Here's the options as I see it:

Comments
===Option 3: Demote all board members and block User:MatthewLMayfield and User:PackMasterFlash for their conduct today, then elect new bureaucrats (the latter to occur in a separate discussion should this option pass)===

Support
* HibiscusCrown20 (talk) 04:43, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't believe he deserves his right to document here, even for Shadeed over the past years regarding his threats from then, here, and Discord.--Crazy Muzzarino (talk) 04:48, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Its time for the new genaration. (talk) 11:32, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
 * You are a stupid, piece of crap who tryed to keep this wiki the same since 2006. ITS NOT 2006 ANYMORE. We need a younger, more better board of admins, who CARE ABOUT THIS WIKI, AND MAKE IT MODERN TILL THE END OF TIME Max1111111 (talk) 03:36, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
 * As Creator of The Official-Unofficial Dream Logos Wiki I say let's make a change and end this controversy created by MathewLMMayfield Poocian (talk) 02:09, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Support
It's about time the wiki enters a new era and be more accepting. I hope this will happen NightmareEnterprises

You know what? I don't care. Block all of us. We'll find a new home and we'll thrive. This isn't the real CLG Wiki anymore. It's a pretender. Stephen will get the rights back and you'll get stuck with this nothing organization. Hate us all you want. I don't care. Enjoy your stupid "Wiki". We'll thrive again, I guarantee it. Just don't expect to be a part of it when we do --MatthewLMayfield (talk) 04:49, 10 September 2022 (UTC)


 * what? make a chum bucket version of the clg or something? y'all already showed that all three of you aren't willing to evolve this site with the logo community at large by being so stubborn about using old dated tactics and because of the three of you this site has still no meaningful progression even when we switched owners so why should we bother keeping you guys when y'all aren't willing to at least try to evolve and in fact quite possibly letting this site devolve?????? Mr. Gann (talk) 05:17, 10 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Doubles for Matt being a transphobe LMgamer36 (2020, 2022-present).webp (Visit my talk page!) 08:05, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
 * oh it goes double for that for sure Mr. Gann (talk) 09:30, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
 * What you did last night was something we all like to call an attempted hostile takeover. Your egotism was what lead to your downfall in the first place. It just goes to show your massive ego caused all this damage. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) 12:08, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Dearest Matthew
 * You and Stephen have about as much legibility behind claims of ownership over CLG Wiki as Ken Penders has over the entire Sonic the Hedgehog canon post-Archie. Not only have you shown that you can not handle community feedback, but you've also shown pure incompetence as leaders of any community. A leader must not be self-obsessed, discriminatory, or have even the slightest possibility of abusing their power for their own gain. You should've searched for advice of the community on many decisions instead of forming a "board of directors" full of people that otherwise would disregard it, as the community would "not know the true purpose of the Closing Logos Wiki". Surprise, it's an archive dedicated to the perservation and analysis of logos, vanity cards and similar branding types. If you can not even upkeep that, if you can't treat the community with any amount of respect, you do not deserve to run any "organization", whether it has you "thrive again" or not. In fact, it's better that we do not join you on your new "nothing organization". Travis tried to keep his CLG Wiki going after we left, and look at it now, the domain is up for sale and the website isn't even running anymore.
 * On that note, why do we even keep old boomers around leading the group like they know anything about newer generations or even what logos are. As it is regarded by many, you're a transphobe in an age where trans people can take down a whole hate forum when they put all their power and minds to it. I can assure you, you will fall the same way if you keep telling yourself that you know better than the rest of the logo community who do not believe in your vision of what this "nothing organization" could be. In fact, what can be regarded as a nothing organization is your fictional World whatever Entertainment, that you keep insisting is real but can not even bother to pay hundreds upon hundreds of dollars to MAKE it exist.
 * Go ahead, register the trademarks, register that domain, do whatever you want, TRY to claim that CLG Wiki was stolen from you. But you will never get back the respect from me or anyone else around here anymore, except for those dumb little toddlers who make GoAnimate Grounded clips of people who gave them reality checks, and the private equity pigs who seek to profit off anything. Thus, you will never get back what made CLG Wiki the CLG Wiki it has been and continues to be. You, sir, are a lolcow.
 * Warm regards,
 * Pantsmode (talk) 15:40, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
 * What a sight to see here. I hope that more people will be made aware of this situation so that their new home will fail and this place will become ANYTHING but nothing.
 * Very pathetic behavior. LogoDatabase (talk) 16:40, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Dearest Matthew
 * OK, boomer.
 * Warmest Regard
 * Ile
 * Ile of Tynwald (talk) 09:09, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

It's not just Matt and Shadeed who are acting very arrogant. Cezar too. This site needs users who not only care about the wiki, but also its community as well. The old BOD members did not show that, doing selfish acts without asking or warning everyone else and blocking others who disapprove of their intentions. Yet the thing they're missing here is consideration for others and being active in cleaning up, expanding, and protecting the wiki from vandals and sockpuppeteers. More recent admins such as HB, Hibiscus, and Logohub have demonstrated their care for the wiki more than the BOD members have. Users like Matt and Shadeed seem to make decisions based on their grievances, whether it'd be flipping out over the promotion of one "unapproved" user or getting heat over unsourced images.

Not to mention the things they are planning, as well as did, violates many rules here on the CLG Wiki, going from duplicating the site (It won't be on Miraheze but still), VERY uncivil behavior with their handling of the controversy, attacking members of the LGBT community, and failing to treat everyone equally by calling us all "disobedient little children". How ironic is that? The harsh thing about humans is they are willing to insult others for doing unforgiving acts, but they do the same thing and are not regretful of that. I've also seen many others unwilling to take criticism and shame others for "attacking them personally" or mock them by saying it's like whining like a little baby. In this case, we're being silenced for voicing strong opposition against this "new direction". Apparently, they did not listen to our complaints and never specified what this direction has and instead stand that they're being truthful and helpful to the wiki.

Much like how these BOD members are "starting over" with a new wiki, so should this reorganized board with bureaucrats who are actually active in stopping ongoing threats such as vandalism and sockpuppetry as well as show a considerate spirit to make editing and discussing on this wiki a more welcoming place. Camenati (talk) 05:24, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

As a wiki-dweller, the current state of the BOD is awfully concerning. A brutal BOD is an authoritative one, one that a community doesn't need. CLG is not a business. It's a community. User:TheAmigo67(chat)

I don't fully know what is going on, but all of this scares me. It's terrifying. I have never trusted SLN since the grooming allegations came out, but now it is clear that he is far from our only problematic leader. A lot of the things Matthew has been saying tonight are especially disgusting. Hope you guys have fun with your knock-off wiki that is against our own rules on duplication. We will remain the true wiki, and even if you [REDACTED]s force us to rename, whatever we come up with will be better than the weird acronym of "CLG". Anyways, on a tangently related note, trans rights are human rights. User:AlmightyKingPrawn(chat)

Oh yeah, I'm going with this. The Board of Directors was a failure from the start and it being carried over to Miraheze was a huge mistake, not to mention that ever since Matthew has been on the fritz of being a transphobe, things have been rather wary around here. I still would like the site to be fixed of its missing descriptions and documentation priorities, not to mention updating every page to be in-line with the current styling, but what those guys were going to do....it wouldn't be pretty. And this is coming from someone who was a moderator who's witnessed the event that caused them to come into existance. Makes ya think. Thisisanswer

Sorry for my recent inactivity due to college, but from what I can gather about this whole situation.. Yeah, we don't need an authoritarian transphobe to run this wiki. And this is something I've been wanting to say, but we don't really need a fictional company with a private and vague BOD with unclear motives to specify and dictate what we, as a community, should do. I (and many others I'm sure) really wanted this wiki to be a more positive environment, for all of us. And after all this is a wiki about logos. LOGOS. This is a logo wiki, not a country, not a business. No need to make things more complicated than it already was. It's time for this wiki to enter a new era. An era where the community drives progress, as a wiki should be.  Logohub   (talk) 07:45, 10 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Honestly agree with this so much. Matthew is such a pathetic person. Even if he starts a new wiki, it would fail pretty quickly. CLGW1K1R8CKS (talk) 16:14, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

I can only watch from the sidelines for so long. Paraphrasing what I said to Shadeed in Matt's talk page, the reason why the community is so vocal about the board's demotion is because Matt, Shadeed, Stephen and some other guy who does diddly-squat on the wiki itself still decides in private about how they want to move forward. NOBODY on the wiki knows what this recurring threat about "cleaning house" meant because all the details they'd released have been extremely vague. I just want a CLG that makes its final decisions in a way that can be known about throughout the entire community. We need new blood, fresh blood that can "get the program" faster than the old guard. I can't believe I used to look up to these guys.

Look at Nickstory Archives and their spinoffs, they're the perfect example of a community-based leadership based on a similar interest on archiving. They elect people based on how mature they are + how active they are on the wiki. They don't need a fictitious holding company made up of few people who barely interact with the community making all the rules. Having a community-run CLG Wiki would be incredibly revolutionary and would mark a new, bold era for the website. One that's made up of actually-active admins like Hibiscus, Logohub and hb1290. No one person or "worldwide brotherhood corporation" should own the CLG Wiki, we don't need a single leader we can look to. The Closing Logos Group follows the people, it doesn't follow the leader.

If anybody from the BoD is reading this, let it be known that you guys are positioning yourselves like DLC and Travis. In the former's case, you were abusing your power just like he did and made rash decisions just so everyone could "get with the program", thus making you extremely unpopular with the userbase and get banned to kingdom come. And in the latter's case, you were so afraid of the platform moving on without you that you played yourself as the victim, blaming everyone else for thankless service, claiming your "company" has exclusive rights to the content (which btw, is against our policy. they aren't on life support like WikiFoundry was), and burning all bridges on your way out. Bravo. I'm glad you guys are gone, we don't need your old way of thinking anymore. It isn't 2007 anymore. It's not 2015 either. Supermarty-O is long gone. LogicSmash isn't the top name in logo uploads anymore. We've moved on. When will you?

I can assure you that in a few years time, people will look to the Board of Directors the way we look at The DLC Organization now. Get with the program. FryLetterman (talk) 08:50, 10 September 2022 (UTC)


 * LogicSmash is still active on uploading videos tho. One of my later page creations has a recent video from LogicSmash. LMgamer36 (2020, 2022-present).webp (Visit my talk page!) 09:16, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

I am extremely disappointed in the behavior from the BoD all around, and I dunno who to be disappointed with most: Matthew for his egotism, sense of superiority, and bigotry, or Stephen despite the obvious flaws in the plan (and ignoring Matt's bigotry). I was kinda considering just those two getting the boot and the other board members being demoted, but given they're all leaving to make their own thing (good luck with that, guys), that probably already happened by default. I was watching it all unfold because I REALLY didn't feel like engaging in the whole thing, but I decided it was time to throw in my two cents. Whether or not this site has to be renamed to something like "The Miraheze Logo Wiki" or something, it WILL move on and see another day. --CooleyBoy10 (talk) 13:23, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

on behalf of an anonymous editor. HibiscusCrown20 (talk) 13:41, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Originally I was only just wanting Matthew and Shadeed to be blocked, but further considering CezarWBC's [https://meta.miraheze.org/wiki/User_talk:Agent_Isai#In_regards_to_the_recent_wheel_warring_on_CLG_Wiki. attempt at backstabbing hb1290 on Meta] by lying to Steward Agent Isai about hb planning the wheel-warring when he did not and now after seeing CuriousGeorge60's attempt at wheel-warring and trying to reblock me and hb, it's become abundantly clear to me that most, if not almost all of the Board of Directors members (except you, Snelfu, you're cool) are childish, powerhungry tyrants who are every bit as bad as the logokids they oh-so fear, can't handle an inkling of criticism towards their decisions and generally should've been disestablished a LONG time ago. Honestly, they are just about or exactly every ounce as bad as Travis was. Kick 'em off here. HibiscusCrown20 (talk) 22:21, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Before I will tell my reasons, I'm beyond sorry for being inactive. I wasn't as interested in logos as I once was, and I have to deal with a lot of stuff.

Anyways, I support this because there are a bunch of users that are either great, or not very much. Putting in more/new bureaucrats is another step for the wiki and might even improve the Wiki because of all of the users that deserve this due to their trustworthiness among other reasons. And another thing, it looks like Matthew is not going to do much to the wiki anymore. And on top of that, it looks pretty official to everyone. So this ain't very long, but I still support it. This is TVB, signing out for a while... TVB (talk) 00:04, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Comments

 * ,, , , , you are all invited to comment on this, provided you are civil. You are free to argue your points against this revocation if you wish. Otherwise, this request, as it stands, will be successful. Agent Isai (talk) 02:33, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Agent Isai. First off, I would like to apologize on behalf of the aforementioned admins for their actions.  I only found out about this earlier today through another wiki, so it's a lot to take in.  I do not condone their misconduct against fellow admins who have clearly been doing their very best to keep the wiki thriving.  I am proud of the accomplishments made by Ethan, TU15 and the rest of the administration here.  You have stepped up and taken the mantle of maintaining a safe environment for everyone to enjoy.  What you guys went through could have been dealt with differently.  I truly believe that all members here working together can make a difference in the logo community.  There is no room for discrimination.  To all you CLG Wiki contributors, thank you for all you do. Snelfu (talk) 03:44, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for this, snelfu. sig.png Talk ·&#32;Edits 04:03, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
 * THANK YOU!!!! Sorry for the excessive formatting on that thanks, but I'm so glad that there's actually somebody on the Board of Directors who actually cares about and is proud of the other admins and users on here and is willing to point out how wrong the actions of the other BoD members were during this. HibiscusCrown20 (talk) 04:48, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Snelfu, your level-headedness is EXTREMELY refreshing given what's been happening lately. CooleyBoy10 (talk) 17:23, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Ok.....I'm just going to be blunt about the entire thing and y'all can take my words and take them as constructive criticism, or y'all can be sensitive about it like the rest of society. Point blank period, the "Agent" dude did the wrong thing by demoting Matt because all Matt was doing was cleaning house of people that was basically neglecting the website by leaving blank pages, posting not related content on the site and so on.  As I have told people over the years about the CLG and I will say it again:  The CLG is about the LOVE of closing logos, the history about them, and, most importantly, the perseveration of the logos, no matter where it comes from.  Being honest, the site has been going down in flames since the huge incident happened back in 2015. I was actually sad and pissed off when that happened because I thought we had this site running like a well-oiled ship.......guess I was wrong.  What needs to happen is for everyone to join together and put your pride aside and get this site back running like the well-oiled ship it once was.  All this petty arguing over power and what is allowed and what isn't every hour or 2 is just plain wrong.  If you can't put your pride aside, then maybe you're in the wrong business (or won't run your own business outside the CLG......just saying). Hope I'm not stepping on any toes, just being blunt about the whole thing and telling what the Lord loves:  THE TRUTH!  Thank you for your time and have a blessed one. SonicoleyD83 (talk) 04:11, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I will leave this website on peaceful terms, ONLY IF this website is renamed. I have the rights to the CLG name, likeness and logo since it was passed on to me. That's the only way you guys will ever have a peaceful transition of power. Stephen C. 03:12, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Based on the comments from you guys yesterday we expected this might be the case. We’ve already been considering ideas for a new identity on discord. Of course an on-wiki discussion on what exactly this should look like will occur once the new leadership is confirmed. sig.png Talk ·&#32;Edits 03:19, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Alright. Good then. Stephen C. 04:22, 11 September 2022 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Final Words
I will say one more thing before I go. I really did want to work with you all. We really did appreciate all the contributions you founded, we really did. And we could have worked together really well, I thought. But I guess it's not meant to be. I just hope all of you will grow up one day and understand how the real world works. But keep drowning in all your so-called, triggers, your stupid pronouns, the weird-ass gender stuff, the self-righteousness we've been dealing with since 2015. all that. You're all weak. All of you. And if you want to play dirty, then fine, play your stupid games. But just remember, you poke at the bull too much, you will get reamed, you'll see one day. You'll see. Enjoy your Wiki. Good-bye forever. --MatthewLMayfield (talk) 05:07, 10 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Trans rights are human rights. :) HibiscusCrown20 (talk) 05:11, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Bye! LMgamer36 (2020, 2022-present).webp (Visit my talk page!) 09:12, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Well, you're gone now, so my words mean nothing. But I will ask WHY somebody's gender identity matters to you so much, especially on a wiki about documenting logos.
 * Good luck on the "new" CLG. CooleyBoy10 (talk) 13:25, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Matthew's comment seems like a child throwing a fit. Just saying. CLGW1K1R8CKS (talk) 16:26, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
 * OK, boomer!
 * dabs* Ile of Tynwald (talk) 09:10, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Hey MatthewLMayfield Try us. Even if you asked, HB1290 wouldn't accept you as an admin, I wouldn't ether. You will be seen as a wannabe, a fraud, a idiot, a power abuser & a nobody. You are the one who's weak. You are not a god, You are someone who thinks he's better than everyone. Your "new" CLG Wiki will be seen as a Copy, a Fake & a rip off. Everyone has rights. Everyone on This wiki, Company Bumpers & Dream Logos will see you as someone who was never needed. See you Never. Poocian (talk) 02:03, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
 * He's baack! LMgamer36 (2020, 2022-present).webp (Visit my talk page!) 02:13, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

It's still happening...
CuriousGeorge60 blocked HibiscusCrown20 and HB1290 indefinitely and unblocked Matthew L Mayfield, against Miraheze stewards.

If pointing this out is how I go out, then so long partners... AlmightyKingPrawn (talk) 21:43, 10 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Jeez... LMgamer36 (2020, 2022-present).webp (Visit my talk page!) 23:58, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Don't worry, Agent Isai has undone me and Hb's blocks and has also made it so that the BoD won't be able to promote, demote or block anyone anymore until this discussion comes to a close! HibiscusCrown20 (talk) 00:01, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Oh my...
 * At least it's undone. TVB (talk) 00:09, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Moving forward part 1: - New leadership

 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 * Because the previous vote has not come to a close, it would be best to have that conclude first to prevent clashes between old bureaucrats and new ones. This section can be reopened once the previous vote is closed by a Steward. Agent Isai (talk) 10:48, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Given the vote above has yielded a clear outcome, I think it’s time to decide what this wiki’s leadership looks like going forward. Below, feel free to nominate yourself or others to be one of our new bureaucrats (subject to the requirements at CLG:RFA). If you nominate another user, be sure to confer with them first. We’ll keep this process going for maybe 5 days unless there’s a blindingly clear outcome before then. Talk ·&#32;Edits 04:43, 11 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Wowee. This whole thing happened on my birthday, and I wasn't even awake to see it unfold. I just looked on the old wiki server and found that the BoD were gone and that ENunn had rebranded it as his own personal server. I then decided to make a new one and with the help of a few others, the server was pretty much identical to the old one. I'd like to become a bureaucrat as I want to help the wiki back up on it's feet and thrive once again, free of the toxic and restricting BoD. The past may have been crummy, but there's always the future to look forward to. NancerCLG (talk) 12:42, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Comments
=


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

I started a thread
i have started a thread discussing the future of this wiki: Forum:Preparing for a new CLG Wiki Max1111111 (talk) 04:53, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Please contribute to this thread! There's some really good ideas on it to improve the wiki. XanderG (talk) 23:09, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

The drama is nothing but pathetic.
Seriously, this is meant to be a logo wiki and all I hear is drama going on with the admins. This whole drama feels like something you would see the Miraheze reception wikis/Qualitipedia do. Oh well, it's the internet so there we go, moving on back to editing and creating pages like I normally do. I'm not angry or anything, just unhappy with it all. Luigitehplumber (talk) 17:42, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Moving forward part 1 (Take 2): Deciding our new leadership structure

 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 * Closing as successful per overwhelming consensus in favor. Bureaucrat policy is created and Administrator policy is ratified by virtue of RfA being codified by bureaucrat policy and the new modification to current administrator election practices. Agent Isai (talk) 00:03, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

With the vote to remove the board closed and successful, it's time to decide how this wiki will be run going forward. Below I've worked up a model policy based on Meta:Bureaucrats and. I have set up a vote below. Feel free to suggest any further additions under the Comments heading. Talk ·&#32;Edits 06:00, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Bureaucrats are users with advanced permissions beyond that of a typical administrator. They have the ability to add or revoke administrative tools and access to wiki configuration options via Special:ManageWiki. The role of bureaucrats are as follows:
 * Determine consensus on RFCs and forum posts pertaining to wiki decisions
 * Decide and carry out the outcome of requests at CLG:RFA and CLG:RFR.
 * Remove the admin rights of any user determined by the community to be unfit to have such tools.

Users can request bureaucrat rights at CLG:RFA subject to the edit requirements denoted there. Requests for bureaucrat rights will remain open for 7 days and those applying must have an 80% support ratio.

Bureaucrat rights can be revoked if a request of no confidence is opened and more than 50% of the vote is in favor of removal. They will also be removed if the user's adminship is removed at any time either by community vote or voluntary resignation.

To align with this policy and other similar policies on WP and Miraheze, I also propose that the voting period for RFA be reduced from 2 months to 7 days (2 months was way too long anyway) and a requiremment for a 70% rate of votes in support be implemented for RFAs to be considered successful.

Support
Way better than a board-of-directors, which isn't really needed for a community. This, if anything, is an outline of what could be beneficial for the Wiki going forward. TheAmigo67 (Wanna talk?)
 * I think this would be a good alternative to the board of directors, which was a really pointless thing to have for a mostly niche community like this.
 * We just need to make sure the right people are chosen and it should be good, even vital for the future of the wiki DevinStudios (talk) 06:41, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Agreed. It's time to take it to the next level, as a team! Snelfu (talk) 06:53, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

This is one great idea. Like it! (Visit my talk page!) 08:19, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

I love this idea, and, of course, I much prefer it over the BoD. Nova (talk) 13:06, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

I'm all for this! HibiscusCrown20 (talk) 15:40, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

You have my support. AnimeTVLogos (talk) 21:28, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. It's time to let the people have a say. BoyOnTheMoon (talk) 22:03, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

A bureaucracy reflects a community wiki more than a BoD.  Logohub   (talk) 03:21, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

I'd be down with this. Thisisanswer

Not much to say, but is one of the best ideas for the wiki. TVB (talk) 16:38, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

We need to have better administration here, so I'm up for it.--Crazy Muzzarino (talk) 23:43, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

Cassie Grandstaff (talk) 00:31, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

I have been watching and observing these wikis since 2014 - 2016. This whole nonsense broke the wikis back then, and now we need to adopt to modern standards. I have not edited much, but I still am a forever member of this community. I like to think you all, and make sure this Authoritarian issue doesn't happen again. JrStudios (talk) 13:05, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

That is good idea for it. I have my support for this! FeMC/Minako Arisato (talk) 04:59, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

That should be. I agree. User:Timpbskid23 5:41, 18 September 2022 (UTC), 8:41, 18 September 2022 (EEST, my timezone)

I agree with this! User:Thesquidgeeks 7:23, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

Biggest yes of my life!!! User:BootScreenFanatic 1:00 PM, 18 September 2022

This is a once-in-a-lifetime big, anticipated change for this wiki. I, alongside the others, support this idea. ( talk )

I'm definitely in favor of the Bureaucrat model, as well as of candidates requiring supermajority support in order to be assigned. That should keep things well in order. I haven't been around all that much until recently but it looks like the previous leadership format was rather incomprehensible before the purge. Toron Beldevar (talk) 15:36, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

Nothing else to say that hasn't already been said, really. AlmightyKingPrawn (talk)

It will be a far better idea! --DisneyInternationalFan (talk) 18:19, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

I TOTALLY agree with this! --User:RSX-798 00:54, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

this is a much more necessary way to actually address the issues this site has, not by very few people who thinks they know better but a strong community that can guide this website into meaningful progress moving forward. User:Mr. Gann 9:23 PM, September 19, 2022 (UTC)

Comments

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Simplification of user groups
I think the abolition of the Board of Directors is a good opportunity to simplify the confusing user group structure to just six groups:


 * Administrators
 * Moderators
 * Confirmed users
 * Bots
 * Users
 * (all)

What are your thoughts on this? --Pingu (talk) 07:04, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

No need for confirmed users. User:Timpbskid23 8:24, 18 September 2022 (UTC), 11:24, 18 September 2022 (EEST, my timezone)

Request for Comments: Rebranding the wiki

 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 * Closing as successful in favor of proposal 1, per overwhelming consensus. This wiki will be renamed to "AVID Wiki". Agent Isai (talk) 19:03, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Recently, a point of great debate has been in regards to this wiki's branding and future. As it stands, CLG means Closing Logos Group but many point out that this name is no longer reflective of the wiki as: 1) This wiki no longer focuses on only 'closing' logos but rather multiple types of motion logos and 2) The Group in the name is a vestigial remainder of when this wiki was affiliated with a Yahoo Group. As such, because of the great debate involved, I am creating this to establish consensus on what to do and to put the great debate aside and settle this once and for all, as this has caused rift as evidenced by the recent incident on the CLG Wiki Discord Server. If you want to add your own proposals for a different name, please feel free to do so as long as you maintain the format of "Proposal X (NAME)" and follow it with a support, abstain, oppose, and comment section. Agent Isai (talk) 00:47, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Proposal 1 (AVID)
This wiki will change its name to AVID which stands for "Audiovisual Identity Database".

Support (1)

 * 1)  I really like this name- Mirabel NicholsComputerwizkid62399 (talk) 17:22, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 2)  The reasons I liked AVID have nothing to do with the drama behind CLG, it's that I dream of the wiki being as great at TVArk (without the long maintenances),  shows that it doesn't solely revolve around the logo community because there are many other logo designers outside of that circle especially ones who are amateurs or beginners, the possibility of having our own archive database for videos without needing to use YouTube, and to be very useful for graphic design or motion graphics references. Also, I really love Colorband's logo with those big letters. It's reminiscent of 00s logo design. Kneesocks Kirisame (talk) 01:01, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 3)  I am in support of AVID. Dreamcast99 (talk) 00:51, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 4)  I think this is the best possible choice for the future of this wiki. ShanuJackal (talk) 00:53, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 5)  AVID is a much more appropriate name that reflects our evolution as a community. It has my full support. LoganStuff (talk) 00:53, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Well, this wiki ain't about closing logos anymore. LMgamer36 (2020, 2022-present).webp (Visit my talk page!) 01:04, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 1)  I Like Avid HifiSara9000seven (talk) 00:53, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 2)  This name is a good name. Daemonspudguy (talk) 00:57, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 3)  Sorry y'all but AVID's too catchy to pass LurkingManiac (talk) 00:57, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 4)  I think AVID is a great name that represents a new beginning for this Wiki. The only constant in this world is change Luke2505 (talk) 01:01, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 5)  I do really think this place needs a new name. Keeping "CLG" could cause problems in the future, though it's very unlikely, but I'd still change it just in case. Also, I agree with the above statement. It is very catchy. Metronome (talk) 01:03, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 6)  I'm thinking of doing AVD, because one of the reasons, is for the wiki to brain more things than just logos, including TV Show segments like the vertical direction demo sketch by Elmo, interstitials like Muppet Time segments on Nick Jr., Music Videos, title cards, etc. making this the world's largest audio visual database to compete with the CLG Wiki the former admins are making following the last week's wheel-war incident.--Crazy Muzzarino (talk) 01:06, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Don't other communities do those types of things already? Why do we need to do that? As I've said before, I don't think the plan was ever deviate from just logos. If you want to do these things, why don't you make your own wiki? Also I think being the world's largest AV database would be too much. Metronome (talk) 01:11, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Just like wat CCGFilms/CCG88 did before; he basically copied the CLG Wiki. LMgamer36 (2020, 2022-present).webp (Visit my talk page!) 01:14, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 1. They don't note anything that's not notable to their community which the reader needs to know what instruments, sounds, backgrounds, anything they've used to produce it, and how it animates. This also goes for color/brightness changes done through remastering, and whatnot.
 * 2. With the other ideas other's have in mind, they want bumpers, windows screens, anything that was previously removed from the other site to be brought back in-order to compete with the CLG Wiki the troublesome admins are planning to do. Crazy Muzzarino (talk) 01:22, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Bumpers and Windows screens are a different subject as those are mostly focused on Identity, which Muppet sketches are not. Dreamcast99 (talk) 01:29, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * So we migrate the whole thing again? LMgamer36 (2020, 2022-present).webp (Visit my talk page!) 01:31, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't think the wiki's community is interested in putting Muppets sketches on the wiki. Dreamcast99 (talk) 01:16, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah. It's best to stick to just production logos, because adding other stuff would just overcomplicate things and defeat the whole purpose of this wiki. Buzzfan120 (talk) 02:29, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * AVD! yes! I tried doing an Audiovisual Media Database on Fandom but it's barely gaining any traffic or visitors DaGurney (talk) 21:10, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 1)  honestly i just don't care what name or logo at this point, i just want to move on and try to see what we can do to further progress this wiki than screaming at other about what name we can use. though, i do agree avid is a nice name and has a better and more broader ring to it than just "closing logos" even if it shares the same name as a multimedia company, and also even if c**** rages at us for keeping the clg name, he can get off of our butts lmao. Mr. Gann (talk) 01:54, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * To add a signature, don't forget to add four "~"s. LMgamer36 (2020, 2022-present).webp (Visit my talk page!) 01:29, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * ah forgot to put it in, thx Mr. Gann (talk) 01:30, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 1)  I strongly support the AVID name, as the name/identity is considered to be a fresh breath of air and a welcoming (plus diverse, friendly, and inclusive) change from the old CLG Wiki branding/naming and how it represents a new beginning for the wiki (besides, the wiki isn't only just for closing logos, but also opening logos, station IDs, boot/start-up screens, and other logo-related miscellany). IAmJefferson (talk) 01:30, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 2)  it's catchy and much more modern.   Logohub   (talk) 01:54, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 3)  It's more modern and fresh, better reflects us as a community, might help to align us with the likes of TVArk and Transdiffusion as a more mature graphic design description and discussion site, plus it lends itself to far better potential logo designs than the letters "CLG", which I've always thought were difficult letters to make a logo out of. sig.png Talk ·&#32;Edits 02:15, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 4)  Strongly support, simply because this helps mark a fresh start for the wiki after the 9/9 drama that not only ended up tainting the reputations of the former Board of Directors, but the reputation of the "Closing Logos Group" name as well (on top of other past incidents). Besides, it better reflects what the wiki has than the previous name. SHADOWNINJA (talk) 02:25, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 5)  CalvinWilkerson (talk) 02:32, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 6)  While I was team "Production Logos Wiki" at first, this is clearly the more popular name and for good reason. It's read grown on me. I like that it's actually pronounceable, it's a little awkward to say "CLG Wiki" out loud. Even if the former BoD's threats towards us keeping the name are fake, I feel a rename is a good choice moving forward so that we can shed our past and THAT whole debacle. I have had people on Twitter mock and attempt to "ratio" me whenever I mention the wiki as to why I know about logos because our current name has become synonymous to outsiders with scary logos and Klasky Csupo edits. The rename will make us far less of a joke.
 * Though... insert Avid Home Entertainment joke here haha. AlmightyKingPrawn (talk)
 * 1)  This name works just fine for this wiki! --DisneyInternationalFan (talk) 04:45, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 2)  If this is a new name for wiki, then the entire design to be rebranded as its modern look. I'm looking forward to it! FeMC/Minako Arisato (talk) 07:12, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 3)  As described by me in the "Preparing for a new CLG Wiki" thread (originally SonicFan91), I think the name fits this wiki more than "CLG Wiki". It can also help us be less associated with heavy drama involved with this wiki (i.e. Cokeburst, DLC, etc.). Nova (talk) 11:38, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 4)  Very good name. Much catchier than saying "CLG Wiki" (a name that, while certainly iconic at one time, has now been tainted, and doesn't roll off the tongue as well anyway). Plus, a great way to finally be able to be taken seriously. Trevor807 (talk) 13:26, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 5)  I Like this name. It's a fresh breath of air from the original name. Poocian (talk)
 * 6)  This feels like the best place for the site to go, it allows us to place the controversy of the old BoD behind us as well. Long live AVID MinistrycraftEntertainment (talk) 02:29, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 7)  Has a nice ring to it, honestly. Works pretty nicely, and a fitting way to start a new era for the wiki. RobowilOFFICIAL (talk) 19:33, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 8)  i mean, its better than having the name "closing logos" while there are some of them. AVID will better much suit us throughout. and also while i have no logo concepts, the best concept is probably plasticitys one imo. User:KinnardASDF (KinnardASDF0 07:36, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 9)  i like it but the database is not that good but the fact that this removed the drama from clg wiki is good G23M08 (talk) 16:06, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 10)  A THOUSAND TIMES YES!!! BootScreenFanatic 19:27 PM UTC+2; 26 September 2022
 * 11)  The time for the CLG name to be retired is long overdue. Bring on AVID! CrazySpruiker2001 (talk) 04:25, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Abstain (1)

 * 1)  While AVID is a valid and recommendable new name, I don't think we should rush to rebranding just yet, because Stephen still hasn't responded to requests for legal proof of the private or shared ownership over CLG and related trademarks (with Matthew and others who claim to own them). In fact, CLG Wiki is nearly untrademarkable due to similar trademarks for the symbol held by law groups, and the acronym being better known than the full name, allowing us to circumvent a possible lawsuit by claiming it's "Company" Logos Group and not "Closing" Logos Group (the full name has been the only trademarked element so far). This is why I am staying on neutral ground and abstaining. Pantsmode (talk) 12:00, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Oppose (1)

 * 1) I don't think this name would serve as a good name. A): AVID Technologies, Inc. can sue us if we use the name AVID. B): Some people may like it, but they want it different, which is my case here. And  I don't support it because, I think the other option (AVIA) is better sounding than this one. EvelynFriedrich (talk) 01:09, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Procedural point, I maintain my neutrality however, AVID Technologies, Inc. cannot sue this wiki for using a similar name. For a lawsuit to be valid, this wiki would have to be competing in the same industry as them. That is how we have various companies sharing the same or a similar name yet never getting into disputes with each other, as they operate in different industries. Agent Isai (talk) 01:18, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Just to be safe, this disclaimer could be put at the bottom: "Not affiliated with AVID Technologies, Inc." DaVinci101 (talk) 18:52, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) People know us as CLG wiki, and AVID is copyrighted, so no name change. Robloxfan999 (talk) 01:27, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Read the text above you. Metronome (talk) 01:29, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) While AVID might be a good name, it could lead to a copuple of things:
 * 1) AVID Technologies, Inc. might effectively sue this wiki, like Evelyn Friedrich-senpai stated, unless this lawsuit would be invalid like Agent Isai stated in his Procedural Point.
 * 2) "AVID" has more results on Google (alone) than "CLG" does, which would mean that this wiki could mean that this wiki would be IDK "less searcheable"
 * A solution would be using the name "AVID Wiki", but that would be redundant somehow
 * I would marked my opinion as either "Oppose" or "Strong Oppose", but it's understandable that we, as a community, want to "leave the past behind" by dropping the CLG name.
 * Setrki Desu (talk) 01:37, 22 September 2022 (UTC) // SETRKI DESHITA
 * If the wiki changes its name, then all results for the old CLG name would redirect here. Plus, people can type "AVID wiki" or "AVID logo", to find the wiki. Dreamcast99 (talk) 01:42, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Hmm... that's what I suspected. Setrki Desu (talk) Setrki Desu (talk) 01:53, 22 September 2022 (UTC) // SETRKI DESHITA
 * 1) As described in a forum post I made, I actually dislike the "AVID" name. The meaning of the acronym feels awkward and doesn't describe the purpose of this site too well. "Audiovisual" points to both sound and visuals. There are many logos that have no music or sound. Not to mention it also represents electronic media, which doesn't just define film, television, and video games, but also slide-tape presentations, church services, and live theater productions, none of which have relations with production logos. "Identity" makes the acronym feel jumbled up and just doesn't feel like a good word to describe logos. "Audiovisual", alongside "Identity", seems to focus more on electronics and what components do they have rather than logos. I will admit it does sounds more smooth and refreshing, but that's about it. Camenati (talk)

Proposal 2 (AVIA)
This wiki will change its name to AVIA which stands for "Audiovisual Identity Authority".

Support (2)

 * 1)  I strongly support this name, as it's for me, the best option, because there aren't any issues regarding the ownership of this particular name (AVIA) and it's more catchy in my opinion, and I feel this IS THE NEW NAME for this wiki. Goodbye CLG, hello AVIA. EvelynFriedrich (talk) 01:14, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * It sounds like a certain airline. LMgamer36 (2020, 2022-present).webp (Visit my talk page!) 01:40, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 1)  The AVIA name is the way to go. --Snappy (talk) 21:19, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Oppose (2)

 * 1)  I don't think this exactly paints the right image for the wiki...It sounds like what we're trying to leave behind. ShanuJackal (talk) 00:58, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Comments (2)

 * This could also be tweaked to Audiovisual Identity Alliance. (which, TBH is what I remember it being when it was originally proposed, not sure when it became "Authority") sig.png Talk ·&#32;Edits 01:18, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Nancer declared that the second A in AVIA stood for Authority hence this. Agent Isai (talk) 01:20, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Proposal 3 (Status quo)
This wiki retains its current name of "Closing Logos Group" (CLG).

Support (3)

 * 1)  No need to throw away brand equity. Thatvhstapeguy (talk) 00:49, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 2)  I like our current name just fine. I've always known it as CLG Wiki, and unless the former admins have proof that they own the CLG trademark, we don't need to rebrand. CLG Wiki belongs to all of us. Buzzfan120 (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 3)  Definitely would support this. Doctorine_Dark.png ( talk ) 12:28, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Proposal 4 (GDE) (attempt 1 GDG)
This wiki will change its name to GDE which stands for "Graphic Design Enthusiast" (GDE).

Oppose (4)
What????? "Graphic Design Enthusiast" doesn't seem like agood title for this website. This is for COMPANY LOGOS, not graphic designing. I'm sorry, but I'll have to oppose this one.
 * 1)  Just, what??? No thanks. ShanuJackal (talk) 01:20, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 2) A good sounding name, although I think it might be too broad for our wiki's purposes. sig.png Talk ·&#32;Edits 01:37, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 3) Somewhat a decent name, but it is too broad and the word "Group" is out-of-date. Dreamcast99 (talk) 01:25, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 4) Sorry but "Graphic Design Enthusiast" sounds too broad. "Graphic Design Group" sounds like a logo agency.   Logohub   (talk) 01:54, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Comments (4)
"Graphic Design Enthusiast" sounds more like its describing one person, rather than a collective/group. Luke2505 (talk) 02:07, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Proposal 5 (AVLG)
This wiki will change its name to a better-enhanced version of the original name, that better reflects the current purposes (Audio Visual Logos Group)

Support (5)
-Strxwberriesrweird
 * 1)  I dunno, I guess it's okay??? Still think AVID's better. Nothing against you. ShanuJackal (talk) 01:35, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 2) It's an OK name, and would be good if we chose to evolve the CLG name. But it is also a bit limiting. So I will put a weak support in. I'd be fine if that was the name, but it is not my number one option. No offense, of course. Dreamcast99 (talk)
 * 3) It's ok, I guess. Still not gonna be the same as CLG...... You know what??? I don't know.....

Proposal 6 (CLG - no acronym)
Keep CLG, but drop the full "closing logos group" name and replace the existing logo.

Support (6)

 * 1) yeah, this is good. Robloxfan999 (talk) 11:41, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 2) I support this name, considering it still keeps the "CLG" name. Honestly, going for something more drastic may leave people feeling confused or naïve, and I personally like that name generally. So yeah, strong support here. Doctorine_Dark.png ( talk ) 12:24, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I support the name, too. Speedy Cervhiche (talk) 12:53, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) I'm ok with this, as long as we keep the "CLG" part of the name. Buzzfan120 (talk) 22:01, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Support (7)

 * 1) I like the name, it's unique, it's also recognizable. JalvinGaming

Comments (7)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

}}

Branding AVID
Now for the next discussion. We have a name, now we need to decide what AVID looks like. Below, I've compiled most of the ideas we have so far. Vote for your favorite! Like before, feel free to add any additional ideas. Also, apologies for some of the images being so enormous. Those ones are Discord media links and I couldn't fix the dimnensions. Talk ·&#32;Edits 23:59, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Support
My logo CalvinWilkerson (talk) 00:10, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

AWM2004 (talk) 10:11, 28 September 2022 (UTC+3)

Oppose

 * 1)  The color scheme looks too...coffee house, to me. Not saying it's a bad design, I'm just saying it could be better. RalstonSullivanMarshall (talk) 18:48, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Proposal 2 - Designer: User:SHADOWNINJA
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1022293929846128661/1023694779739029554/My_AVID_logo_idea_7.png

Support

 * 1)  The design flows really well (reminds me of 21 Laps all the time), and with the four colors intact, gives off a sense of professionalism and playfulness at the same time. Also, as with some other designs, this one is highly customizable too, and could be fit for any special occasions. PM pinter (talk) 00:16, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1)  As someone who wants to join the world of film and tv production, this logo makes me die inside. It's too reminicent of AVID technologies' logo and I personally cannot stand to use their software. It's so idiosyncratic and it's meant to be that way as it's supposed to keep novices out. It's meant for professionals and professionals only. This is coming from someone who is considered "AVID Certified". No dice. RalstonSullivanMarshall (talk) 00:27, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Support

 * 1) I love this one, because it keeps the old feel of the CLG while changing the logo to something modern and upbeat. CLGCreator Returns! (talk) 00:13, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 2)  WCNY is in the background, 1000000/10 Obama hamburger (talk) 00:17, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Kid named WCNY: ★ Nova (talk) 01:42, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) This logo reminds me of the old CLG Wiki logo (back from the WikiFoundry days). IAmThe789Guy (talk) 00:21, 27 September 2022 (UTC) User:IAmThe789Guy (talk)
 * 2)  per the previous two. This retains the CLG vibes. Nordlentille (talk) 00:53, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 3)  I love the idea of ​​keeping the colorful logos mosaic within the design. Jet Dzhet (talk) 03:18, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 4)  I love how this still keeps the logo background, which help reflect the company's purpose. I like this logo overall. Doctorine Dark (talk) 03:22, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 5) I like how the logo matches the background. The design of the logo is perfect, too. I'll definitely like to see this on the website. R.I.P CLG logo (2007-2022)
 * 6)  I personally believe this is the way to go for a CLG rebrand. Not only is the logo really well-designed in my eyes, but the idea of maintaining that classic CLG background keeps a bit of the old while still feeling mostly new. This is honestly a win-win for me and I'd definitely love seeing it on the wiki. DannyTheMuppetMan 12:07, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 7)  This is a mix of brandings both old and new. Many other brands should go down this "hybrid branding" route. HavocMan2000 7:49, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 8)  Very very good logo! I really like this! Sickminecraft45 (talk) 09:29, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 9)  This looks like a fine logo. GPalmer (talk) 16:13, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 10)  This design gets my vote because it keeps the spirit of the old CLG alive. Areyoutyler (talk) 16:47, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Abstain
abstain

Support

 * 1)  I just really like the aesthetic and colors of this one. ShanuJackal (talk) 00:08, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 2) It's a very good idea: similar to the CLG Wiki logo but still its own thing. And the way we got here was quite the road with so many drafts. Hence why my vote goes with this one. Trevor807 (talk) 00:14, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 3)  This is the one. Obama hamburger (talk) 00:15, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 4)  My favorite so far. a.v.a. (talk) 00:27, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 5)  Very creative design! --DisneyInternationalFan (talk) 00:42, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 6) My choice, it's recognizable, has elements of the old CLG logo but still distinct. Though I agree it'd look better without a gradient   Logohub   (talk) 00:47, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 7)  I love this logo. It feels fresh & it doesn't stray from our roots. KPyall (talk) 00:59, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 8)  Good design, though it'd be better if it was plain black CalvinWilkerson (talk) 01:05, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 9)  I'm digging this! After seeing the creative process first-hand in the server, I gotta go with this. Feels somewhat similar to the old logo, but stands out enough where its it's own identity. Good stuff. FryLetterman (talk) 01:12, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 10)  I REALLY LOVE THIS ONE :D HifiSara9000seven (talk) 01:25, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 11)  Mainly because it retains old CLG logo vibes which is an amazing throwback to this wiki's roots. ★ Nova (talk) 01:45, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 12)  I absolutely love the way the colors and the aesthetic of this logo stand out. The design is cool, too. Definitely put this on the website. User: Strxwberriesrweird
 * 13)  Now this is a very eye catching identity! Airvibes (talk) 04:21, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 14)  Initially I was rooting for Colorband's proposal, but I thought that all the trial and error during its design phase just had to pay off eventually. For that reason, and the fact that this is a cool design, I'm voting for this one. &#60;span style&#61; &#34;color:#f55197&#34;&#62;&#91;&#91;User:Setrki Desu&#124;&#39;&#39;&#39;SETRKI&#39;&#39;&#39;&#93;&#93; *&#60;/span&#62; &#60;span style&#61;&#34;color:#002f87&#34;&#62;&#91;&#91;User_Talk:Setrki Desu&#124;&#39;&#39;talk_pag&#39;&#39;e&#93;&#93; ~&#60;/span&#62;  (talk) 04:32, 27 September 2022 (UTC) (setrki deshita)
 * 15)   Now this totally reminds me of the CLG Wiki. Support for nostalgia! Timpbskid23 4:42, 27 September 2022
 * 16)  this feels like the perfect balance between the old brand and the future of the site. Huge fan of it! MinistrycraftEntertainment (talk) 11:34, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 17)  This is the perfect mix of old and new! Robloxfan999 (talk) 11:40, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 18)  I really love this colorful design! TheRealMarcel2000 (talk) 11:49, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 19)  I can't wait to animate this. IlCattivo25 (talk) 12:36, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 20)  Looks amazing, in hopes this becomes official A7286584 (talk) 15:08, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 21)  WOW! This logo is super colorful, i like it so much. This is a logo with a very attractive and perfect look.--Tobias Benson01 (talk) 17:23, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 22)  This design is eye-popping I may say, while still true to the logo of the CLG name. Glad this is getting the most supports than the others. BaldiBasicsFan (talk) 23:20, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 23)  I love this! Esaïe the man (talk) 00:53, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 24)  Gotta love this new look! PokeRapMonster (talk) 05:14, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 25)  THAT REMINDS ME OF AVID'S OLD LOOK,KEEP THE TRIDITIONAL AS WE THINK! MikeZhou49 MikeZhou49 11:56, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 26)  This looks very creative and I'm loving the gradient design of this logo. TheOddKid2568 (talk 05:05, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 27)  This logo is so awesome! And yet creative, too. Gives me CLG vibes, good work! SillenArchiveNPS (talk) 11:23, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 28)   I like that design and colors tho. User:Cattotlebofficial (talk 15:40, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 29)  Very good. This isn't all "in-your-face" unlike most other logos I've seen, it gets the point across very well. Very, VERY brilliant work. TheAmigo67 (talk) 04:53, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
 * , but without the four-colour gradient as the default. One or two colours may be better. --Pingu (talk) 17:47, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 1)  This gives flashbacks of all the ex - CLG wiki logos, I will like seeing this one for this new rebrand. Not only with the design, but also with the color palette. That's all for this one :-) User:Luli Logo (User talk:Luli Logo) 20:35, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Abstain

 * 1)  I know this logo is probably going to win, but I'm not gonna vote on it because one, I prefer (and also chose) Colorband's proposal and two, I'd hate to vote against a logo that went through a lot of trial and error but managed to come out looking good at the end. Nonetheless, I admire Pudsp's dedication to his design and sincerely wish him well on his graphic design stint. LurkingManiac (talk) 00:45, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 2)  I like this logo, but I don't love it, and I feel like it would be better if the colors in the logo was less of a gradient and more like stripes, like the Central Cake Logo. That's just my opinion though, and who am I to rule against the majority...even though that is a very punk thing to do. RalstonSullivanMarshall (talk) 18:45, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1)  Meanwhile I do like this Logo the Icon Looks too similar to the Triangle Engineering of Arkansas Logo Poocian (talk) 18:53, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 2)  To be honest the rainbow gradient makes it look kinda generic. Jet Dzhet (talk) 02:59, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Comments
I'd support this logo only if you got rid of the tacky rainbow gradient. --Axel (talk) 00:44, 27 September 2022 (UTC)


 * That's the beauty of it. :) Pudsp_CLG_SIGNATURE.png 03:55, 27 September 2022 (UTC)


 * I like this one! =D TemaGub2002 (talk) 15:44, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Proposal 6 - Designer: User:NancerCLG
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/664949861044584452/1023190462510678106/AVID_and_CBD.png

Support

 * 1)  Retains the classic CLG design while being sleak and disconnected. Unsure why most people don't outwardly like this one. Obama hamburger (talk) 00:13, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 2)  This one has been my favourite for awhile, it feels like a throwback to the old Transamerica/United Artists logo of the 1970s, while also harkening back to the old CLG days. In my honest opinion, this has been the only one that fully worked for me. --RalstonSullivanMarshall (talk) 00:16, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 3)  I support this design because it's modern, it reminds me of the current CLG Wiki logo, and also has a modern touch to the wiki itself. EvelynFriedrich (talk) 00:20, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 4)  This is really slick and timeless. AlmightyKingPrawn (talk)
 * 5) I support this design because it reminds me of the soon to be former CLG Wiki logo and I feel that as we move ahead into our new era, we should honour our history as a fan forum for closing logos, yet embrace our future as a database dedicated to the preservation of such logos. (Largerchips) 15:35 30 September 2022 (AEST)

Oppose

 * 1)  Honestly, the icons look like they could've come from anywhere, and the first logo only symbolizes the A, which is literally half of "Audiovisual." Overall, these logos feel quite lacking, undistinctive, and fail to recapture the spirit of the old CLG logo. Pudsp_CLG_SIGNATURE.png 02:46, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Proposal 7 - Designer: User:NancerCLG
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1022293929846128661/1024004917544882206/unknown.png

Support

 * 1)  This is what should be used! It's too good not to be used especially if it's from Nancer. BootScreenFanatic - 27 September 2022, 12:49 AM UTC+2
 * 2)  thank Etruongs7 (talk) 15:00, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Proposal 8 - Designer: Spotlight (Discord)
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1022293929846128661/1023684949427105913/AVID_Logo_Full.png

Oppose

 * 1)  This looks very dated, in my opinion. Very much looking like a bad VHS Company from the 80s. No offense. --RalstonSullivanMarshall (talk) 00:47, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 2)  2000's flash game Etruongs7 (talk) 15:50, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Proposal 9 - Designer: Plasticity (Discord)
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1022293929846128661/1023677041691865128/unknown.png

Support

 * 1)  This one I also seem to like alot! :) I'm surprised there's not much votes for this one. HifiSara9000seven (talk) 01:27, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 2)  from the looks of it, it looks pretty cool in my opinion. --Tobias Benson01 (talk) 17:25, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 3)  I like this one, I think it looks cool, i like the colours too Iheartparamount (talk) 00:58, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Proposal 10 - Designer: Kinnard (Discord)
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1022293929846128661/1023640170509119628/avidly3.png

Support

 * 1)  This is a good logo, reminds me of Sony VAIO. SillenArchiveNPS (talk) 11:26, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Proposal 11 - Designer: Colorband (Discord)
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1022293929846128661/1022561262133051422/AVID_Logo_Scribbles.svg_-_Inkscape_2022-09-20_22-21-31.png

Support

 * 1)  This one's been my favorite for a while now. sig.png Talk ·&#32;Edits 00:11, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 2)  Mine as well LurkingManiac (talk) 00:16, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 3)  I prefer this one If I were to be honest, I wouldn't even choose my logo lol. HifiSara9000seven (talk) 00:16, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 4)  This is the perfect logo. LoganStuff (talk) 15:14, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Proposal 12 - Designer: Colorband (Discord)
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1022293929846128661/1022561262514753536/AVID_Logo_Scribbles.svg_-_Inkscape_2022-09-20_21-32-36.png

Support

 * 1)  I think the 2000s-style design of this logo looks like a breath of fresh air to me. Also like the colours. Diskkihoax (talk) 21:05, 27 September 2022 (UTC).

Proposal 13 - Designer: User:HifiSara9000seven
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1022293929846128661/1023481094303121428/unknown.png

Comments
Just to let you guys know, I don't really like this one as much as I did before when I Created it. It may have been a good idea in my head, but I don't know. --HifiSara9000seven (talk) 01:09, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Abstain
One side of me says "ehh", but the other says "this is one of your best friends choose that one". ★ Nova (talk) 02:13, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1)  Not sure what this is supposed to be. Obama hamburger (talk) 00:16, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 2)  Reminds me of an early-2000s broadband internet provider. Trevor807 (talk) 05:30, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 3)  LMAO I'm opposing my own logo. This was to make a point to that guy that he could make a non eye-bleeding Y2K logo. I might make a GENUINE one but it's probably too late anyways lol PuzonCLG (talk) 20:28, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Looks like an alien's Target anyway LMgamer36 (2020, 2022-present).webp (Visit my talk page!) 07:21, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Proposal 16 - Designer: User:Pantsmode
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1022293929846128661/1023167549745147954/unknown.png

Oppose

 * 1)  For a "masterful graphic designer with a prestigious portfolio of 5 public projects on behance", this is very simple and hard to read. Obama hamburger (talk) 00:20, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 2)  Same reason as Obama hamburger. Plus, it looks more like ᗡИD to me. Trevor807 (talk) 05:26, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 3)  I agree with them also. HifiSara9000seven (talk) 06:48, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 4)  Looks like a capsule to me.

Oppose

 * 1)  ND LurkingManiac (talk) 05:20, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Comments

 * 1) This predates ELH's design btw LMgamer36 (2020, 2022-present).webp (Visit my talk page!) 01:42, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 2) The fact there's no support option on this one.... oh no --HifiSara9000seven (talk) 06:57, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * That's now been fixed sig.png Talk ·&#32;Edits 10:26, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1)  Sorry but it's kind of a mess to me. Not very readable. Trevor807 (talk) 17:00, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 2)  Nope nope nope nope nopeity nope CalvinWilkerson (talk) 02:57, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 3)  instant ramen brand Etruongs7 (talk) 15:47, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 4)  How can I understand this text!? It's just like the first Family Home Entertainment logo, it's unreadable!. User:Luli Logo (User talk:Luli Logo)
 * 5)  The A appears to be melting upward. SuupaaSmartiMax92 (talk) 23:01, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1)  While it's simple, the font makes it more of a logo from the 90s. LMgamer36 (2020, 2022-present).webp (Visit my talk page!) 01:33, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
 * That's right, this gives some 90's-like vibes. It can be good in some company contexts, but not in this one. Luli Logo (talk) 20:58, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1)  Too simple. Doctorine Dark (talk) 02:06, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Makes it look like a Google product either. LMgamer36 (2020, 2022-present).webp (Visit my talk page!) 03:55, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1) Colors too 1990s internet-like, bad attempts at overlapping the letters, and trying to merge the I with the D makes it read "AVD". Trevor807 (talk) 04:33, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1)  Bruh? CalvinWilkerson (talk) 23:46, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 2)  Why. Pudsp_CLG_SIGNATURE.png 23:55, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 3)  Not only is the logo bad, but even if it were good it's a bit late anyway. Trevor807 (talk) 04:32, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 4)  Crappy MSPaint Style!talk(UTC)
 * 5)  how old are you Etruongs7 (talk) 15:46, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 6)  Incomprehensible. I don't like the overlapping letters. I almost couldn't see the yellow V SuupaaSmartiMax92 (talk) 22:59, 30 September 2022 (UTC)