I don’t see how sifting through thousands of disparate symbols, illustrations, photos, and clip art, is the right use of time and resources. It’s difficult to judge submissions effectively when shown in isolation. Some context and a variety of brand marks would be hugely beneficial for achieving consensus on any single direction, especially with a jury of 30 people (interestingly including Nobel Peace Prize laureate Mikhail Gorbachev) as well as 12 others drafted in to help with the process.
These thoughts from the swissmiss comment thread present a stronger direction:
“It would’ve been a better idea to hire a number of acknowledged designers to create their versions and then let the people of the world decide.”
— Silver Sova
If design can be crowdsourced, that’s how it might work — where crowds give an opinion on a variety of pre-designed outcomes, not where crowds do the actual work in the hope of catching a carrot (referencing spec websites).
And by hiring, money doesn’t necessarily need to be exchanged. Pro bono design is always an option for worthy non-profit causes. It’s like Armin said, “The problem with noble spec is that it attracts too many hippie logo designers.”
Elsewhere, graphic designer Elizabeth Eadie shares her thoughts.
The contest’s over. Here’s the chosen Human Rights logo.