3
$\begingroup$

This Q&A is about what we want our Favicon and "Site Badges" to look like. It is about two tiny images, not about the design of the site's background (that will take much longer).

Soon we will be out of private beta and visible to the world.

Please respond to this question by:

It's great to provide a large image that everyone can see without squinting and a 32x32 image so it's clear what it will look like when it's tiny - unless there are vector graphics available don't use fine details that won't scale correctly.

  • Vote on the answers (as well as the question) to indicate which design (if any) is preferred.

If you spot a design that is too close to another site or have a constructive feedback about an answer you should leave a comment. Votes on Meta don't affect reputation.

$\endgroup$

closed as off-topic by Henry WH Hack v2.1.3, Ryan Cory-Wright, Michael Trick, LarrySnyder610, double-beep Jun 11 at 5:59

This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:

  • "This question does not appear to be about Operations Research Stack Exchange or the software that powers the Stack Exchange network, within the scope defined in the help center." – Henry WH Hack v2.1.3, Ryan Cory-Wright
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • 3
    $\begingroup$ I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it concerns an issue that Beta sites can't handle $\endgroup$ – Michael Trick Jun 11 at 2:21
3
$\begingroup$

Sorry, but you don't get a custom site design or any custom designs until the site gets fully graduated from the beta stage. So when will that be? The answer is I don't know and no one knows for sure not even the Stack Exchange employees it may take years or it may never graduated.

If this site goes into the public beta stage, it will remain with this theme as with all Stack Exchange beta sites.

Some special cases like https://quantumcomputing.stackexchange.com and https://ai.stackexchange.com have custom designs because those sites are sponsored by outside corporations/organizations.

We should really be focusing on building the community at this point and beyond it.

See Graduation, site closure, and a clearer outlook on the health of SE sites

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ There are some beta sites that have custom favicons (e.g., vegetarianism, CiviCRM, and CraftCMS). I can't find any with custom badges but maybe there are. Has the policy changed regarding custom favicons while in beta? $\endgroup$ – LarrySnyder610 Jun 11 at 1:14
  • $\begingroup$ Henry, can you offer a link to an updated policy statement? Emacs did their's 3 months after starting, Worldbuilding even has gone beyond favicon and badges to the background of the webpage. $\endgroup$ – Rob Jun 11 at 2:06
  • $\begingroup$ @Rob Worldbuidling and Emacs are "Graduated" they have full site designs... that's exactly what Henry's talking about. Once a site reaches a certain volume of questions per day (10), it becomes eligible for a site design but we do not grant designs by default to all sites. Many of our oldest sites (some as much as 8 years old) do not have designs or favicons because their volume is too low. $\endgroup$ – Catija Jun 11 at 2:23
  • $\begingroup$ @LarrySnyder610 A handful of sites (like Vegetarianism) have unicode symbols for their logos instead of text but they're not custom logos. They're built exactly the same as the text ones, just with a symbol. CiviCRM has explicit permission to use the official logo of CiviCRM and ... well, I'm not sure what the deal is with CraftCMS but both of them are special cases, not the standard. In general, this post is correct. We do not create custom content for sites that do not meet specific requirements. $\endgroup$ – Catija Jun 11 at 2:26
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Catija Thank you for your input. I thought that we might see if people here were interested prior to asking; I couldn't see asking first and then come here and post this question, only to find out it's of no interest. I agree that we have a lot to work on, this I saw as one of many things. We've had a bit of discussion in our chat about 'how can we do more'. I think we are heading towards success, rather than tanking. Time will tell. $\endgroup$ – Rob Jun 11 at 2:34
  • $\begingroup$ @Catija in that case, looking forward to one day being able to think about these things, but for now, voting to close. $\endgroup$ – LarrySnyder610 Jun 11 at 2:34
  • $\begingroup$ K, reopen in a year or three. $\endgroup$ – Rob Jun 11 at 2:35
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Y'all can always talk about it. Many of our sites start thinking about these things early on because we kinda tell you to. One of "The 7 Essential Meta Questions of Every Beta" is to talk about site design... unfortunately, that post is really outdated and, in reality, few sites get designs before they've been live for 2-3 years at least. Until the Anime design (still in progress) and Code Golf design (coming out tomorrow) it'd been over a year since we'd made any designs other than the sponsored sites mentioned in this answer. Nothing wrong with chatting, just don't expect any result. $\endgroup$ – Catija Jun 11 at 2:37
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Question six. :) $\endgroup$ – Catija Jun 11 at 2:38
1
$\begingroup$

Site Favicon

This suggestion was derived by combining the symbol for "Big O Notation" with the symbol for "The Set of Real Numbers" and rendering them in a "black box" using MathJax (which, coincidentally, was the first question asked on our Meta).

  • It has the benefit of being immediately recognizable by everyone as the Operations Research site.

Here it is, rendered at two different sizes. I prefer the larger one scaled down, but while that retains the desired proportions it loses too much resolution; the second one needs the $\mathbb{R}$ shifted down and left a tiny amount:

$$\bbox[white,3px,border:2px solid black] {\negthinspace\Huge\mathcal{O} \negthinspace\negthinspace\negthinspace\negthinspace\negthinspace\negthinspace\negthinspace \overset{\Large\mathbb{R}}{\,}\,\,} \qquad \bbox[white,3px,border:2px solid black] {\negthinspace\normalsize\mathcal{O} \negthinspace\negthinspace\negthinspace \overset{\scriptsize\mathbb{R}}{\,}}$$

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

Site Badges

Suggestion for gold, silver and bronze badges (vector artwork available at PngTree):

large badges

Small version, note how the different colored ribbons make distinguishing gold from bronze very easy:

tiny badges

Because they are available in vector format scaling will be better than my cellphone's editor.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Don't the badge icons have to be very small and simple, so they fit on the badge itself, e.g., here? $\endgroup$ – LarrySnyder610 Jun 11 at 1:35
  • $\begingroup$ @LarrySnyder610 Is that the correct link, I ask rhetorically, that image is the indicated size. $\endgroup$ – Rob Jun 11 at 1:51
  • $\begingroup$ But your badge images above wouldn't fit on the badge, would they? $\endgroup$ – LarrySnyder610 Jun 11 at 1:52
  • $\begingroup$ @LarrySnyder610, they should. I'm OK with the laurels being trimmed off, and the ribbon doesn't have to have a chevron cut (it could be cut straight). It's good to be able to distinguish between gold and bronze because sometimes a single badge appears alone (people have wrote Metas requesting a better differentiation between the two either due to eyesight or other reasons). $\endgroup$ – Rob Jun 11 at 2:27

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .