[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [Bug-gnubg] branding: choosing an exact name

From: Albert Silver
Subject: RE: [Bug-gnubg] branding: choosing an exact name
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 19:08:49 -0300

Actually, when referring to it I drop the backgammon altogether and
refer to it simply as GNU. Most do since when discussion comes to its
features or analysis, no one is likely to think the institution is what
is being referred to. In any case it is how I referred to it in the
tutorial, and how I see it referred to in the GoL forum as well as the
RGB newsgroup.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: address@hidden [mailto:bug-gnubg-
> address@hidden On Behalf Of Alef Rosenbaum
> Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 6:50 PM
> To: GNU Backgammon Bugs
> Subject: [Bug-gnubg] branding: choosing an exact name
> As a highly professional piece of software I'd like to see it having a
> professional image. Thus we need some branding guidelines! First place
> start is the name. The full name is clearly "GNU Backgammon", however
> abbreviation is far from consistent. Should we have a vote? Do you
> A. gnubg
> B. GnuBg
> C. GnuBG
> D. other
> My own preference is for GnuBg which I think looks nicest and reads
> easiest.
> Out loud I think I'm more likely to read GnuBg as "Ga-noo Backgammon"
> GnuBG as "Ga-noo Bee-Gee" which sounds a little silly.
> In emails I'm sure most people will always type gnubg, but this seems
> bit
> too casual for the website and documentation.
> -Alef
> _______________________________________________
> Bug-gnubg mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]