[CBW_Exec] New Logo

Mon Aug 22 11:38:48 CDT 2011

me too! 

Marisa 

Dr. Marisa A. Klages
Associate Professor
Director, Outcomes Assessment
LaGuardia Community College-- CUNY
718-482-5677
mklages at lagcc.cuny.edu

>>> Susan Naomi Bernstein <susan.naomi at gmail.com> 8/22/2011 11:18 AM >>>
Since it's volunteer graphic artist labor, I vote for "liking" the blue
unequivocally -- and leaving it as is.

Peace and best,

Susan

On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 11:16 AM, J. Elizabeth Clark
<lclark at lagcc.cuny.edu>wrote:

> It sounds like we're overwhelmingly for blue. Since this is being done by a
> volunteer, how strongly do you feel about getting rid of the dots and
> changing the size of the font for the BW? I can go back to her again, but if
> we "like" it, then I won't. I'm clear that we like the blue. I'm not clear
> where we're at with the other changes that have been suggested.
>
>
> Thanks everyone!
>
>
> Liz
>
> J. Elizabeth Clark, Ph.D.
> Professor of English
> LaGuardia Community College--CUNY
> e-mail:  lclark at lagcc.cuny.edu 
> Phone:  718.482.5665
> www.jelizabethclark.com 
> >>> "Lalicker, William"  08/22/11 10:42 AM >>>
> Shannon, I agree. The crispness of the blue trumps the visual interest of
> the reflection. And the kind of dotted line motif suggests development and
> growth, I think...so I vote for the blue. --Bill
>
> William B. Lalicker, Ph.D.
> Professor of English (Main Hall, Room 534, 610.436.2268)
> Dean's Assistant for Student Issues (Anderson Hall, Room 119C,
> 610.436.3521)
> College of Arts and Sciences
> West Chester University
> West Chester, PA 19383
> wlalicker at wcupa.edu 
>
> From: cbw_exec-bounces at tamu-commerce.edu [mailto:
> cbw_exec-bounces at tamu-commerce.edu] On Behalf Of Shannon Carter
> Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 9:46 AM
> To: Conference of Basic Writing Executive Board; tpeele at boisestate.edu;
> cbw_exec at tamu-commerce.edu 
> Subject: Re: [CBW_Exec] New Logo
>
>
> lovely! I REALLY like the blue, for some reason. Crisp, vivid, dynamic. I
> like the reflection on the other, but it seems less legible and . . . well,
> blue seems right to me. Love the dotted line connecting the C with the BW.
>
> Nice!
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cbw_exec-bounces at tamu-commerce.edu on behalf of J. Elizabeth Clark
> Sent: Wed 8/17/2011 7:58 AM
> To: tpeele at boisestate.edu; cbw_exec at tamu-commerce.edu 
> Subject: [CBW_Exec] New Logo
>
> i there,
>
>
> How do you like these new logos? Can we decide on one of these, or would
> you like additional choices (these are based on our last go around of
> comments in June).
>
>
> Liz
>
> J. Elizabeth Clark, Ph.D.
> Professor of English
> LaGuardia Community College--CUNY
> e-mail:  lclark at lagcc.cuny.edu 
> Phone:  718.482.5665
> www.jelizabethclark.com 
> >>> Thomas Peele  07/11/11 11:07 AM >>>
> Thanks for this alert, Shannon. A comprehensive Wikipedia entry would be a
> great, on-going project for graduate courses in basic writing theory and
> pedagogy.
>
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 10:48 AM, Shannon Carter <
> Shannon_Carter at tamu-commerce.edu> wrote:
>
> > **
> >
> > Hi, all--
> >
> > Hope your summer is excellent!
> >
> > Just wanted to share that BW is on Wikipedia now, which you may already
> > know. Perhaps one of the EB wrote it! Yay! Hannah has been suggesting
> this
> > for some time, and I was so glad to see it!
> >
> > It's at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_writing 
> >
> > Only thing is this: IT IS ABOUT TO BE REMOVED. OR MAY BE REMOVED.
> >
> > See--
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Basic_writing#Synthesis 
> >
> > REVISIONS NECESSARY, IT APPEARS. TOO ACADEMIC. Not yet within the genre
> of
> > "encyclopedia."
> >
> > I'd hate to see this happen. Anyone able to take this on?
> >
> > Here's what they need to happen (from url above)--
> > This is obviously an essay prepared as if for some professional
> > publication. It shows the typical patter of focus on a few specific
> topics,
> > rather than encyclopedic coverage: it deals with the work of some
> selective
> > figures, rather than the field as a whole ,citing almost entirely from
> their
> > writings. I presume it was copied directly from something published
> > elsewhere, but even if it was written directly for Wikipedia, it is not
> > encyclopedic. Almost the entire text was contributed by two editors who
> have
> > contributed nothing else, and two ips, both geolocating to the same
> network
> > in the Western US.
> >
> > The following needs to be done:
> >
> >    1. a considerable part of the treatment of the key authors needs to be
> > moved to the articles about them individually, if not already present
> there.
> >    2. A range of secondary and tertiary sources needs to be consulted
> >    3. all major theoretical and practical strands in the subject need to
> be
> > at least mentioned
> >    4. a slightly wider range of external websites with resources on the
> > subject needs to be listed.
> >
> > If nobody responds here, as is likely, I'll probably stubbify it or --if
> I
> > have a chance -- rewrite it. DGG ( talk ) 09:33, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > CBW_Exec mailing list
> > CBW_Exec at tamu-commerce.edu 
> > http://mailman.tamu-commerce.edu/mailman/listinfo/cbw_exec 
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CBW_Exec mailing list
> CBW_Exec at tamu-commerce.edu 
> http://mailman.tamu-commerce.edu/mailman/listinfo/cbw_exec 
>