[Sugar-devel] idea for Sugar slogan and name

[imm]

On 11 Jan 2009, at 15:41, Bryan Berry wrote:
> Sugar is still unknown to the vast majority of people in the US or
> anywhere else. They won't be confused by the name change. Our  
> relatively
> small but dedicated band of enthusiasts could handle the name  
> change w/
> ease.

Absolutely.
My take on this, though, was that the "obscurity" of the Sugar name  
was why we had to emphasise it directly in the slogan.


> I see your perspective but the word "kid" has different  
> connotations for
> me. I often think that adults - referring to chronologically mature
> human beings - take themselves too seriously and are less inquisitive
> than kids.

Indeed so, you are quite right.
(Slight tangent) I recall seeing some work that separated out the  
concept "adult" from the concept "grown-up" on broadly that basis -  
i.e. that "grown-ups" were chronologically older (but not necessarily  
wiser or more mature) where "adults" were older and (hopefully)  
wiser. Part of the separation was based around retaining some aspects  
of childhood inquisitiveness...

> I see the reference to "kids" as a positive one and not
> patronizing.

Yes, so do I, but my worry is how we project that meaning to an  
"outside" group who will inevitably bring their own meanings to the  
phrase.

> I think "kids" in its general use is more effective than "Where people
> learn and play" or "Where chronologically young people learn and play"

(Another tangent) Is age an issue?
 From time to time I have worked with groups of "adults" (in the  
chronological sense) that have varying degrees of learning difficulties.
I am certain these groups would benefit from the educational and  
music creation tools that Sugar brings, but they are not kids, in the  
eyes of education authorities, or in their own self-images. Where do  
they fit in?
>
>> So, I'd suggest:-
>>
>> "Sugar: A Place to Learn and Play" or perhaps "Sugar: A Place to Play
>> and Learn"
>>
>> I like the second form better. I think that ending on "learn" seems
>> (to me, at least) to emphasise that aspect of its function. The first
>> form seems to flow better though. Maybe that's just me.
>
> I like having "Learn" before "Play" because a lot of people
> unfortunately feel "Play" is a frivolous concept. We know better as  
> our
> concept of "learning" in SugarLand involves a whole lot of play :)

Yes - I could not decide how best to order these two concepts in the  
phrase. It is tricky.
I decided that, for me and this s only one opinion, Play before Learn  
was stronger because the phrase then ended on the concept Learn, so I  
*hoped* that someone glancing at it quickly would be left with that  
concept "Learn" in mind.

I also liked the idea that you would start with Play and  
"incidentally" (or "accidentally") end up at Learn... It seemed to me  
that reflected the mission in a way.
-- 
imm