AVID:Requests for Comment/Logo contests for actual companies

=Let's not just preserve logos, let's make them!= So, I just thought that since we have some good artists on this wiki, I was thinking we could start making logos for actual companies, like our own design agency. Say, a company gets sick of their old logo. Then, they could come to this wiki. When that happens, we could hold a contest where users of this wiki could make a logo for them, and the best one wins and then, the company would use that as their new logo. This could also make AVID more famous, and more than just a community. 16:43, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1) ehh, it's not really the purpose of the wiki. AVID is mainly a media archival site like TVARK and LMW, and not a design agency.   Logohub   (talk) 16:48, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
 * 2) There is no way this could actually happen ForcedExcess26 (talk) 16:49, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
 * 3) per everyone who voted. If this RfC could be closed right now, it would be called a failure. As Logohub pointed out, AVID is mainly a media archival site like TVARK and LMW (and possibly Transdisfusion [provided I got the name right]) rather than a design agency. For that reason, I'm out. AUnnamedDragon 1:29 PM, May 28, 2023 (CET)
 * 4) lmao what, i don't think these companies know about avid. plus, if they get sick of their old logo, they would logically create a new logo themselves. Cattotld (takl) 17:43, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
 * 5) Per everyone. Gilby1385 (talk) 19:46, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
 * 6) per everyone. T807sig.png · Talk · Edits 21:20, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
 * 7) per everyone. We aren't professional graphic designers, we're logo enthusiasts. There's a massive difference. Eternity Media Group Wordmark.png (Lets chat!) 23:45, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
 * NGL this RfC sounds like you saw Rebrand the Brand on the Discord server, and decided "hey we should get paid for this!" Eternity Media Group Wordmark.png (Lets chat!) 01:41, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * , misrepresents the purpose of the AVID. JackAMLA (talk) 08:56, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * 1) as a well-meaning but infeasible concept with a recommendation for bureaucrats to exercise discretion and close as soon as convenient even if they see this below the 10 mark, as having no real chance of success. --Raidarr (talk) 20:57, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * 2) I can't see a company wanting to go with a bunch of hobbyists for their new logo over an established and professional design agency. Luke2505 (talk) 21:24, 29 May 2023 (UTC)