[Nfb-editors] NFB logos/divisions
Mike Freeman
k7uij at panix.com
Sat May 21 18:51:29 UTC 2011
Right on, comrade!
Mike Freeman
sent from my iPhone
On May 20, 2011, at 16:46, Bridgit Pollpeter <bpollpeter at hotmail.com> wrote:
> Mike,
>
> I understand what you say, and I can see your point to a certain extent,
> but I disagree that divisions having the logo with incorporated elements
> would become confusing and only create a "hodgepodge" of divisions.
> Again, it is still the NFB logo, which would not change itself, but an
> added element would just identify what division/group a communication
> was from.
>
> Ultimately I don't think it is a huge deal either way.
>
> I agree about the NFB being "one movement," but divisions have sprouted,
> and many of them work to further goals that either do nothing to promote
> equality (I mean in a political sense) or direct their goals in a
> different direction. In theory, I think the divisions can be good, but
> the truth is that they do not bring in the attendance desired, and the
> philosophy begins to water down with many members brought in through
> divisions.
>
> This is just life and I understand this, but I have seen a broad
> spectrum of views on NFB philosophy in different divisions, and often it
> is not up to par with Federation philosophy. I do not blame the leaders
> of divisions for this, but I do think divisions need to ensure that a
> positive and progressive philosophy is being instilled, and that it is
> clear that each division is an extension of the Federation, and that NFB
> standards and rules will apply.
>
> It is sad to me when I see Federation news or philosophy posted on a
> division email list only to be met with people ranting about how it is
> off topic or does not belong on this list. In my opinion, anything
> pertaining to the Federation and blindness is appropriate for any
> division and its email list.
>
> While the divisions work to draw people in because of a particular
> interest, I don't think many of these people have any interest in the
> Federation as a whole. This also goes for chapters and affiliates. We
> need to work to bring a more unified voice to the organization.
>
> When people join a chapter or affiliate or division, they must
> understand that they are joining the Federation. It is important they
> have a clear idea of the goals and mission of the NFB. It's like when
> you get married- you're not just marrying that person, but the family.
> I know a lot of NFB division members who do not consider themselves
> Federationist, and in my opinion, this is very flawed.
>
> Not everyone understands that the Federation is a political group, and
> its first priority is to pursue equal opportunities for the blind. Not
> everyone cares about this either. We've discussed this before, but I
> would rather have a smaller group who is dedicated to this goal, than
> have a large membership, but who mostly cares nothing for furthering
> these efforts.
>
> Now, having said all that, divisions do have the potential to draw
> members in who might not otherwise be interested. I'm not sure, though,
> how some divisions can express the political action as the most
> important goal. I admit I have mixed feelings on the existence of most
> divisions. If it were the other way around where people joined the
> Federation than later became involved in interest groups, it may work
> better. But usually it is the other way around, and sadly, not enough
> of these people have a heart for the priorities of the NFB.
>
> I do find that the parents of blind children, student and guide dog
> divisions are essential. These groups work towards sub-goals as the
> Federation obviously can not direct its attention towards every aspect
> vital to the life of blind people. These groups are able to focus on
> one area and cultivate action within that topic. For the most part, I
> believe these divisions are maintaining Federation goals and philosophy,
> though of course, they are not perfect.
>
> This is where I think affiliates and chapters are failing. I think it
> is their responsibility to draw the brunt of membership in and instill
> that philosophy. This is not the best analogy, but we don't have kids
> skip grammar school before jumping into college where they can choose
> what major they want. To me, the chapters are like grammar school- they
> work to bring in fresh members, and try to instill a positive
> philosophy. Then we have more members who understand what we do and
> why.
>
> Perhaps this makes no sense, most likely. *grin* I think my point is
> that divisions are great for those of us who get what the Federation is
> about, and we just enjoy the company of others who share our interest.
> We need to pump chapters up and get them to understand this direction.
>
> Here is my issue. We can work to correct society's thinking about
> blindness, but if blind people don't believe it, it doesn't really
> matter what society thinks. We have to change what it means to be blind
> for the blind before we can truly change the minds of the non-blind.
>
> I think the chapters are the foundation of this organization, and more
> new people should be brought in through chapters and not divisions.
>
> Okay, I'm rambling and lost my point long ago. *smile*
>
> Bridgit
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 19 May 2011 14:31:35 -0500
> From: Bridgit Pollpeter <bpollpeter at hotmail.com>
> To: <nfb-editors at nfbnet.org>
> Subject: [Nfb-editors] NFB logo
> Message-ID: <BLU0-SMTP7370076CA4C6F714A7A834C48E0 at phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
>
> Mike,
>
> Trust me, I understand the importance and concept of logos. Through
> various campus activities, I've worked with public relations teams, and
> I now am interning with a PR group. One thing that is stressed over and
> over is the importance of branding and maintaining it.
>
> Technically, yes, it would be changing the logo to add something like a
> guide dog, but this is why it would be presented before the board before
> implementing.
>
> However, since it is not a complete logo face lift, it is not changing
> the brand of the NFB. It is still simple and still NFB, it just gives a
> specific brand to a division. Where is the problem in that?
>
> Our organization has many, many groups and it makes sense that these
> groups would have the opportunity to incorporate something specific to
> their group to bring distinction as to what NFB group it was. The
> Whosit would still be the Whosit, which is the official NFB logo, but
> then a group can be specific with a design element so that it would be
> the NFB guide dog group, or the NFB Texas affiliate, or the NFB student
> division, etc.With so many interest groups, some which communicate
> frequently outside the organization, it would be beneficial to bring
> more specificity to these groups.
>
> And now that I recall, I remember during the newsletter committee
> meeting last year in Dallas, an employee of national said they can
> create specific logos for NFB groups if divisions/groups wanted. Very,
> very interesting, but I'm being told here that this is not an option. Do
> explain.
>
> And as for the websites, of course a volunteer organization must
> consider the cost, but there are ways of developing websites that are
> cost-effective. We have a lot of people in the organization who better
> understand this stuff and could assist in gathering info. Something
> like the design of a website is just as crucial in terms of branding as
> the logo is. When people visit a NFB website, they should automatically
> know it is NFB by its look and design.
>
> Creating a template for a home page of NFB websites would not be a huge
> undertaking, and individual web masters could incorporate the design the
> best way they know how. This would bring uniformity to the organization
> that currently doesn't exist. There are other volunteer-based
> organizations that manage to develop this uniformity to make the
> branding cohesive.
>
> National has all the funds and best people working to maintain what
> little branding exist, but it is equally important any other NFB related
> groups follow national's format. Perhaps national needs to look at
> sharing and helping with some of the cost for changes that would provide
> uniformity. Perhaps affiliates and national divisions need to look at
> the cost of redesigning websites and fundraise to meet this need.
> However it is handled, I guarantee you, it is important for the NFB to
> have one look. The logo alone does not accomplish this.
>
> If we ever want immediate recognition as the Federation, we need to
> understand as a collective the importance of adopting whatever
> precedence national sets so we have uniformity.
>
> And any affiliates and divisions who have websites are obviously already
> paying for it so to change the design would not require the same cost as
> starting a website. And if national provides a template, that does not
> mean websites have to use the same programming national does in order to
> make any change. They should be able to work within the context of
> whatever website format they use to adopt changes that reflect
> national's website.
>
> Anyway, I'm only trying to think of ways to strengthen this
> organization. I know some think I'm a loose canon who wants to change
> the organization and does not prescribe to NFB standards, but the reason
> I joined the Federation is because the core beliefs resonated with me,
> and the mindset I already had after losing my vision was the mindset of
> the Federation. I had nothing in common with most organizations,
> agencies and people who were blind. Then I discovered the NFB and found
> a collective who felt the way I did about blindness.
>
> I'm very motivated and dedicated, and I only wish to help improve
> wherever we can. No person or entity has all the answers and does
> everything right all the time, we work to stretch and strengthen. That
> is all I want- to make this organization bigger than it has ever been,
> and succeed in ways that are fruitful.
>
> Any critique is not made lightly with malice intended to defame and
> undermine. Regardless of what upper echelons think, I've been loyal to
> this group, and I have fought tooth and nail for this organization.
> Success can only come when we work together and not become elitist. Not
> just anyone should be able to jump into leadership positions, but we
> also need to be open-minded when it comes to how we present the
> organization. Trying new things, expressing different perspectives is
> not equal to changing the philosophy and mission of the Federation. No
> matter what I may think about the direction or presentation, I
> whole-heartedly believe in the philosophy of this group. I know I am
> not winning popularity contest, and I'm very opinionated, but my passion
> is driven by my motivation to make this organization better.
>
> Bridgit
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 18:17:39 -0700
> From: "Mike Freeman" <k7uij at panix.com>
> To: "'Correspondence Committee Mailing List'" <nfb-editors at nfbnet.org>
> Subject: Re: [Nfb-editors] NFB logo
> Message-ID: <00a901cc15c2$8c5e70e0$a51b52a0$@panix.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Bridgit:
>
> That still changes the logo. The thing about logos is the KISS rule
> applies
> - Keep it Simple Stupid!
>
> As for website uniformity, we are an organization of volunteers; only
> the national office and a fortunate few affiliates have staff. For the
> rest of us, we do website programming as best we can. Enforcing website
> uniformity would require all to have common tools and people with common
> programming skills and common templates. Either that or everything would
> have to be done at HQ and I shudder at the bureaucracy that would
> foster. (grin)
>
> Mike
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 19 May 2011 18:15:36 -0700
> From: "Mike Freeman" <k7uij at panix.com>
> To: "'Correspondence Committee Mailing List'" <nfb-editors at nfbnet.org>
> Subject: Re: [Nfb-editors] NFB logo
> Message-ID: <00a501cc168b$6d828fc0$4887af40$@panix.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Bridgit:
>
> I'm afraid we may have to agree to disagree. I believe that separate
> logos for separate divisions places too much importance on divisions at
> the expense of the NFB as a whole. In my view, the great strength of NFB
> is that we are *one* movement -- not a hodge-podge of groups with
> separate interests. To my way of thinking, the only reason for divisions
> is that that the NFB as a whole cannot specialize sufficiently to
> adequately confront the many incarnations of the problems re blindness
> that we face.
>
> I'll go further: I believe that taking "NFB" out of division names was
> an aggregious error and should be corrected posthaste.
>
> The upshot of this conviction is that while divisions should have
> separate letterheads, there should be only one logo -- that of Whozit
> since that one's been trademarked by NFB.
>
> Incidentally, Hazel tenBroek, wife of the NFB's first president,
> adamantly opposed divisions as fragmenting the Movement. Given the
> seeming desire for customized logos, I wonder if she might not have been
> right?
>
> Mike
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nfb-editors-bounces at nfbnet.org
> [mailto:nfb-editors-bounces at nfbnet.org]
> On Behalf Of Bridgit Pollpeter
> Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2011 12:32 PM
> To: nfb-editors at nfbnet.org
> Subject: [Nfb-editors] NFB logo
>
> Mike,
>
> Trust me, I understand the importance and concept of logos. Through
> various campus activities, I've worked with public relations teams, and
> I now am interning with a PR group. One thing that is stressed over and
> over is the importance of branding and maintaining it.
>
> Technically, yes, it would be changing the logo to add something like a
> guide dog, but this is why it would be presented before the board before
> implementing.
>
> However, since it is not a complete logo face lift, it is not changing
> the brand of the NFB. It is still simple and still NFB, it just gives a
> specific brand to a division. Where is the problem in that?
>
> Our organization has many, many groups and it makes sense that these
> groups would have the opportunity to incorporate something specific to
> their group to bring distinction as to what NFB group it was. The
> Whosit would still be the Whosit, which is the official NFB logo, but
> then a group can be specific with a design element so that it would be
> the NFB guide dog group, or the NFB Texas affiliate, or the NFB student
> division, etc.With so many interest groups, some which communicate
> frequently outside the organization, it would be beneficial to bring
> more specificity to these groups.
>
> And now that I recall, I remember during the newsletter committee
> meeting last year in Dallas, an employee of national said they can
> create specific logos for NFB groups if divisions/groups wanted. Very,
> very interesting, but I'm being told here that this is not an option. Do
> explain.
>
> And as for the websites, of course a volunteer organization must
> consider the cost, but there are ways of developing websites that are
> cost-effective. We have a lot of people in the organization who better
> understand this stuff and could assist in gathering info. Something
> like the design of a website is just as crucial in terms of branding as
> the logo is. When people visit a NFB website, they should automatically
> know it is NFB by its look and design.
>
> Creating a template for a home page of NFB websites would not be a huge
> undertaking, and individual web masters could incorporate the design the
> best way they know how. This would bring uniformity to the organization
> that currently doesn't exist. There are other volunteer-based
> organizations that manage to develop this uniformity to make the
> branding cohesive.
>
> National has all the funds and best people working to maintain what
> little branding exist, but it is equally important any other NFB related
> groups follow national's format. Perhaps national needs to look at
> sharing and helping with some of the cost for changes that would provide
> uniformity. Perhaps affiliates and national divisions need to look at
> the cost of redesigning websites and fundraise to meet this need.
> However it is handled, I guarantee you, it is important for the NFB to
> have one look. The logo alone does not accomplish this.
>
> If we ever want immediate recognition as the Federation, we need to
> understand as a collective the importance of adopting whatever
> precedence national sets so we have uniformity.
>
> And any affiliates and divisions who have websites are obviously already
> paying for it so to change the design would not require the same cost as
> starting a website. And if national provides a template, that does not
> mean websites have to use the same programming national does in order to
> make any change. They should be able to work within the context of
> whatever website format they use to adopt changes that reflect
> national's website.
>
> Anyway, I'm only trying to think of ways to strengthen this
> organization. I know some think I'm a loose canon who wants to change
> the organization and does not prescribe to NFB standards, but the reason
> I joined the Federation is because the core beliefs resonated with me,
> and the mindset I already had after losing my vision was the mindset of
> the Federation. I had nothing in common with most organizations,
> agencies and people who were blind. Then I discovered the NFB and found
> a collective who felt the way I did about blindness.
>
> I'm very motivated and dedicated, and I only wish to help improve
> wherever we can. No person or entity has all the answers and does
> everything right all the time, we work to stretch and strengthen. That
> is all I want- to make this organization bigger than it has ever been,
> and succeed in ways that are fruitful.
>
> Any critique is not made lightly with malice intended to defame and
> undermine. Regardless of what upper echelons think, I've been loyal to
> this group, and I have fought tooth and nail for this organization.
> Success can only come when we work together and not become elitist. Not
> just anyone should be able to jump into leadership positions, but we
> also need to be open-minded when it comes to how we present the
> organization. Trying new things, expressing different perspectives is
> not equal to changing the philosophy and mission of the Federation. No
> matter what I may think about the direction or presentation, I
> whole-heartedly believe in the philosophy of this group. I know I am
> not winning popularity contest, and I'm very opinionated, but my passion
> is driven by my motivation to make this organization better.
>
> Bridgit
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 18:17:39 -0700
> From: "Mike Freeman" <k7uij at panix.com>
> To: "'Correspondence Committee Mailing List'" <nfb-editors at nfbnet.org>
> Subject: Re: [Nfb-editors] NFB logo
> Message-ID: <00a901cc15c2$8c5e70e0$a51b52a0$@panix.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Bridgit:
>
> That still changes the logo. The thing about logos is the KISS rule
> applies
> - Keep it Simple Stupid!
>
> As for website uniformity, we are an organization of volunteers; only
> the national office and a fortunate few affiliates have staff. For the
> rest of us, we do website programming as best we can. Enforcing website
> uniformity would require all to have common tools and people with common
> programming skills and common templates. Either that or everything would
> have to be done at HQ and I shudder at the bureaucracy that would
> foster. (grin)
>
> Mike
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nfb-editors mailing list
> Nfb-editors at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-editors_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> Nfb-editors:
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfb-editors_nfbnet.org/k7uij%40pan
> ix.c
> om
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 09:46:31 EDT
> From: LoriStay at aol.com
> To: nfb-editors at nfbnet.org
> Subject: Re: [Nfb-editors] NFB logo/divisions
> Message-ID: <bfde.749cf865.3b07cab7 at aol.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
>
> I'm in favor of divisions. originally I wanted to "have a place to
> hang
> my hat" which is why I helped found the Writers' Division. We have
> gotten
> members who might otherwise have felt NFB didn't address their
> interests.
> But once in, the people become Federationists as they see what NFB
> stands
> for. Can't complain about that.
> Lori
>
> In a message dated 5/19/11 9:17:36 PM, k7uij at panix.com writes:
>
>
>> Bridgit:
>>
>> I'm afraid we may have to agree to disagree. I believe that separate
>> logos for separate divisions places too much importance on divisions
>> at the expense of the NFB as a whole. In my view, the great strength
>> of NFB is that we are *one* movement -- not a hodge-podge of groups
>> with separate interests. To my way of thinking, the only reason for
>> divisions is that that
>> the NFB as a whole cannot specialize sufficiently to adequately
> confront
>> the
>> many incarnations of the problems re blindness that we face.
>>
>> I'll go further: I believe that taking "NFB" out of division names was
>
>> an aggregious error and should be corrected posthaste.
>>
>> The upshot of this conviction is that while divisions should have
>> separate letterheads, there should be only one logo -- that of Whozit
>> since that one's been trademarked by NFB.
>>
>> Incidentally, Hazel tenBroek, wife of the NFB's first president,
>> adamantly opposed divisions as fragmenting the Movement. Given the
>> seeming desire for customized logos, I wonder if she might not have
>> been right?
>>
>> Mike
>>
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 07:54:49 -0700
> From: "Wunder, Gary" <gwunder at nfb.org>
> To: Correspondence Committee Mailing List <nfb-editors at nfbnet.org>
> Subject: Re: [Nfb-editors] NFB logo/divisions
> Message-ID:
>
> <5D835FCE86C94346B617F04A46A43140082C151233 at VA3DIAXVS651.RED001.local>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> I too favor divisions both because they can help get us new people and
> because they help us focus on issues which are too specific to apply to
> a diverse audience. People who have never used a computer aren't going
> to understand what we're talking about when we wrestle with how to
> efficiently address the graphical user interface or the Windows coding
> standards which, when violated, make an application unusable.
>
> I do believe there are times when our divisions fail to make a
> significant effort to bring people into the wider movement. One of the
> criticisms of the Voice of the Diabetic was that it's readers got a lot
> of first-hand information about diabetes and blindness, but didn't get
> much information about the national Federation of the blind and the
> wider movement they should participate in if our goal is really to move
> from where we are to first class membership in society. I see as
> exemplary what Marion Gwizdala has done in taking every opportunity to
> emphasize the unity of his division with the rest of the movement.
> Similarly, I think Kevan Worley has worked hard to spread the message to
> state vendor organizations that they have an obligation that goes beyond
> the things that involve their specific businesses.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nfb-editors mailing list
> Nfb-editors at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-editors_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for Nfb-editors:
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfb-editors_nfbnet.org/k7uij%40panix.com
More information about the NFB-Editors
mailing list