Lottery Post reveals N.C. Lottery logo misfirePrevious TopicNext Topic

fja

One of the  funnier comments I have seen in a while. I bet he heard a lot of 'em...he's a putz.

>Lottery Post feels that if CBS News can knowingly display forged documents to hurt President Bush in the weeks before a presidential election, then showing a small logo graphic is not too bad.

One is shaky ground when one tries to use an investigation into Bush's highly suspicious military service as an example. Unless one forgery disproves the entire case. I know readers will want to find out more about the fascinating case of the "war president" who avoided war. Follow this link for more info about his military "service".  http://www.thenation.com/doc/20040816/williams 

Well, why stop there, there's more fun info to be learned about Bush's past!http://www.realchange.org/bushjr.htm#DUIsources 

This site above was written before news of Bush's "friend" Jeff Gannon's many White House visits were exposed, here's some more info on that. http://www.rense.com/Datapages/ganndat.htm 

Oh, was this about the North Carolina lottery? Yes, in comparison to the deeds detailed above, it is not too bad.

Todd wrote:

<<Excuse me, but I'm not profitting from displaying the logo.  Maybe you would like to contibute the same amount out of your pocket that I do every month, just to make this site run?  If you saw how much money I LOSE on a monthly basis, you would eat your little words. >>

As I said, there may or may not be much profit. What's that flashing thing at the top of the page (or the link to the offer for premium memberships on this reply page) about, though? Those links down the left side? Do they generate any revenue (or are you hoping they'll generate revenue)? That your overall expenses may result in a loss doesn't mean you don't profit from anything you publish. The poster who claimed that the NC lottery would profit (though all of their proceeds go to education and their bottomline is intended to be zero) and Lottery Post doesn't profit hasn't returned to explain why they think that's relevant, but I'm assuming (yeah, I know) that it's based on the motive behind what might be copyright infringement. If the copyright owner wanted to make an issue of your use of the logo your only defense is that it constitutes fair use. Lack of an overall profit doesn't mean there wasn't a profit motive in the use, but the motive is meaningless in determing whether or not the use is infringement.

<< It looks like I have unearthed a hard-left radical here >>

Yup, you got me. My comments were clearly based on my radical political beliefs. If you had justified publishing the logo by saying it's not too bad because the swift boat vets slandered Kerry or because innocent Iraqi civilians have been killed or because Georgia Pacific is cutting down the homes of the spotted owl I would surely see the obvious relationship topublishing the logo. Publishing the logo was a bold political statement and a powerlful attack against all of us hard left commie pinko fag tree huggers. In hindsight I can't imagine what I was thinking when I questioned the rationale for publishing it.

Quote: Originally posted by Todd on February 17, 2006

I can see why the board members thought it looks like a plant.

I think it looks like a palm tree, and it reminded me of the S.C. Lottery logo:

I really can't believe they were serious about using that thing.

I also can't stand when they keep referring to these things as "education" lotteries.  They got the lottery approved, they should just call it the N.C. Lottery, and stop with the "education" thing.  They act like someone is going to say, "Oh, OK, it's for education, put the rest of my paycheck on 1-2-3."

I'm wondering if the small purple things might be more recognizable as something in a better reproduction. I guess that if you decide you want something that looks like fireworks you can pick almost anything and when you look at it you'll see your fireworks. If they had used something that looked like fireworks to people who didn't already know if was supposed to be fireworks they'd have had a perfectly good, if not great, logo. I'll at least give them credit for trying to design it in-house instead of farming it out to an ad agency and paying a million bucks or more of the taxpayers' money. If a private company wants to spend millions on their logo like NBC and Pepsi when they changed their logos a few years back that's their choice, but I don't think tax money should be spent without being pretty damn sure the cause is justified.  Maybe I'm wrong, but I just don't believe that a logo's effectiveness is based on how much people like it. Either will people recognize what business it represents, or they won't. The fireworks may be puzzling, but anybody who can read can tell that th elogo is for the NC lottery.

As far as "education  lotteries" go, every business with sense tries to sell itself. People who think spending 10 grand on a Rolex watch is stupid are usually content to just not buy one instead of trying t prevent the rest of the world from buying one either. A lot of people who are opposed to gambling, OTOH, devote a lot of effort to telling the rest of us what we can gamble on, or if we can even gamble at all. Telling th epublic what the revenue goes to is just trying to put some positive spin on things to reduce the opposition. They're certainly not the only ones to use the "we need to do it for the children" argument. What bothers me about it "education lotteries" is claiming the money goes to a education (or any other cause)  when the reality is that it often doesn't increase  spending for that cause by a penny. It may not be true in all states, but often putting proceeds from the lottery into something just means that less money from the other revenue sources is put ito that cause.

You said it, not me.

You sound very angry, you need to lighten up.

I think that the education portion of the name comes from the fact that in South Carolina someone copyrighted the SClottery.com website before the lottery commission got the chance to.

So, they chose to go that route. Guess NC had to do the same.

It also helps them in their quest to make people think that the proceeds go to education, so they can live with it.

"I really can't believe they were serious about using that thing"???????? (quote by Todd).............Psykomo can't believe they are so disappointed
and ashamed about the thing.............that they don't want to be honest
with the public...........before the GAMES BEGAIN? Do they have anything
else to hide is my real concern about this LOTTERY!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It L@@Ks like the Rorschach Inkblot test..............to Psykomo, just stare
at it long enough and watch the NUMBERS jump out of that silly..."BOX"!

WATCH it long enough & the STARS may turn into a jack-in-the-box$$$$

LOL

PSYKOMO

If they are going with computer draws, they should have just used a fractal...

(image courtesy of wikipedia.org...)

That's what happens when people rush.

 Anyway.. I tried hitting the link to see what their new logo looks like on their site but it gave me an error of "timeout".

The font of the letters looks very similar to the font in the Tennessee Lottery (Lottery Tennessee) logo.

 Hypersoniq..............that logo is a HOOT with a  HOOK

 and NC could use....

HELP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! .......LOL$$$$$

 PSYKOMO

Sure makes me want to go out and plunk down a dollar - maybe two, after a couple of drinks.

Or maybe a bag o' 'shrooms....LOL

lets hope they come up with something more presentable.sometimes you can tell a lot about a lottery by its logo.....something haphazardly put together is not going to work.

No matter what they come up with,there will be a long list of critics who will come out to say how much they hate the logo and how bad it looks,etc,etc.It will just be another excuse for the anti-lottery people to bash the lottery for their own selfish reasons.They don't want the lottery,but they sure care a lot about how it operates.Maybe these critics should back off and stop trying to micromanage every aspect of how it's organized.