See it on the right?
Click to expand
See it on the right?
Click to expand
I’ll tell you, do you know how many residents put up signs to support using taxpayer money to decrease capacity on Masonic Avenue?
None, zero, nada.
But people on Masonic seem to love putting up signs going against the plan to take out 100-something parking spaces.
I don’t know why the electeds who voted for this project would change their minds now – it seems only a lawsuit* could have any effect at this point.
The windmill tilting continues – this sign looks homemade:
You can’t fight City Hall, right?
*And even then, I don’t see how you’d win.
Here it is, from just last week:
“We walked away from the logo itself in part because we knew that our broader communications strategy and the other elements of the visual identity system could advance without it. Being able to move on with other elements of our work and the rest of the visual system is actually a tribute to the symbol’s success and our overall strategy.”
To review, this was the reaction at the time.
Anyway, since the new logo got ashcanned, its proponents have gone on the road to sing its praises. Why? I don’t know. How does this sort of thing benefit UC?
Now, here’s the reaction from the designerly community. First from CCullen:
I don’t buy the false narrative. This was a brand exercise that overreached and was as a result a complete failure. The notion that this design can be celebrated when not embraced has no understanding of the goal of branding in the university ecosphere–engagement is the sine qua non of a university brand, and in this case a university system brand. This is an Oscar nomination for a film that has never been released. The video was perfectly prescriptive–the traditional seal was doomed, and the rest is back tracking and hindsight. When it lives, celebrate it, until then just know it was an epic failure and a waste of scarce public funds.
I agree with CCullen. I attended the UC affinity session at the AIGA conference in Minneapolis and it was one of the most uncomfortable experiences I have had in the design world. What should have been a presentation about why the logo works for what their goals were turned into an hour long passive-aggressive temper tantrum that only fueled the fire of controversy. I will admit that the identity system as a whole is certainly successful. The promotional materials and such that went along with it were beautiful but I simply cannot get past the ridiculous logo.
AIGA stands for American Institute of Graphic Arts. But not officially. Officially, AIGA is AIGA. Anyway, they have a big trade convention every couple of years.
And this was the talk of the town last weekend in Minneapolis, Minnesota, The Little Apple:
“THE UC LOGO CONTROVERSY: HOW 54,000 PEOPLE, THE MAINSTREAM PRESS AND VIRTUALLY EVERY DESIGNER GOT IT WRONG.
And here’s an early review:
But who is to blame? That’s right, The Media:
Few design engagements capture the public’s interest like an identity redesign, and few redesigns have been more publicly controversial than the recent effort by the University of California. In this facilitated session with UC Creative Director Vanessa Corrêa and Designer Kirill Mazin, Christopher Simmons examines the good, the bad and the ugly of the logo controversy, including the process, the rollout strategy, and the discourse it created amongst the public, the media and the profession. What lessons can we learn from this controversy? What has it taught us about the relationship between design and society at large? What cautions does it offer for the next big redesign? This is an interactive session. Bring your questions, opinions and an open mind.
Usually when people run in the corrupt Twitterloin / Civic Center / Tenderloin area, it’s because they’re either victims or perpetrators, right?
So just jogging around for fun, well, that’s something new I think.
Click to expand
All the deets from the oldest and largest law school in the West:
“Purpose: To encourage healthy living and life balance through regular athletic activity; to promote a positive image of UC Hastings to the larger Bay Area community through involvement in charity runs; and to foster a sense of community at UC Hastings”
I’ll tell you, the “average,” the typical user of Masonic will in no way benefit from spending eight figures worth of taxpayer dollars on a 3000 foot stretch of Masonic betwixt Fell and the new City Target Store up on Mervyn’s Heights at Geary.
And that’s sort of funny ’cause this recently-greenlighted project was billed as being “accommodating” to “all users,” as something that would benefit all.
Now myself, perhaps I’ll end up benefiting from the changes, we’ll see. But I live too close to Masonic to feel right about advocating ‘n stuff. Seems selfish. (I’ll tell you, I sure feel sorry for those living in the West Bay, out there in the Fog Belt.)
But you, if you use Masonic to get from one place or another, you’re going to be fucked during the AM and PM drives. That’ll also include car drivers, and passengers, and bus drivers and passengers, etc. Cyclists will benefit but for peds, well, it won’t really matter. Abutting property owners will probably appreciate the new trees on the new useless medians. And that’s about it.
Where all the traffic will go during the morning and evening drives, well, we’ll see.
Anyway, here’s the latest:
Joshua Calder was pretty drunk when he killed Nils Linke, but the other driver, the one who killed the purported “jaywalking” ped, wasn’t he DUI as well? (I’ll point out that both these deaths happened outside of the rush hours.)
Anyway, here are some more deets from the rebel forces:
IDK, I think this dude’s court-appointed mouthpiece would be happier if dude hadn’t turned off Find My iPhone before negotiating the $180 finder’s fee.
“Uploaded on Jul 10, 2013
A friend of mine dropped her phone. This guy found it, and demanded $180 to get it back after disabling ‘Find My iPhone’. The police agreed to set up the sting. The guy you see from the back in the hat is the undercover cop. He goes to pay the guy and the three others move in. Especially notice the one flick out his baton. At this point, I am asked to stop filming, but allowed to continue after informing the officer of my rights. He only asked I moved a little down the block, which I complied with.
UCSF is finally getting off its ass and doing something about all those eucalyptus trees and this is the response?
I cry foul.
Now, leaving aside the fact that the Mount Sutro “cloud forest” aint a cloud forest and it aint a forest* neither, UCSF does stuff.
What do the whiny millionaire NIMBY neighbors of UCSF do? Nothing.
Of course, there are impoverished hippies who similarly oppose UCSF doing anything to manage this area, so I’m going to look into this when I can.
But the assumption is:
WHY SHOULDN’T UCSF BE ABLE TO MANAGE ITS LAND?
See? UCSF does stuff. What do YOU do?
Click to expand
To Be Continued…
*What is it really? A stand, a grove, a wood? (Which is the most insulting?) Alls I know is that Christopher Robin used to play in the Hundred Acre Wood, not the Hundred Acre Forest, right?