Triangle thingy spottings

[Grumpy]

Heh...



http://www.vanguardmil.com/civil-air-patrol-holiday-ornament-with-civil-air-patrol-logo-p-15846.html

There's handful of other new stuff, some of it pretty sharp.
http://www.vanguardmil.com/civil-air-patrol-new-items-c-6_2496.html&items_per_page=120

Wow!  This is cool!  I'll get one for a Christmas present for our testing officer at the squadron.  He'll love it!   

[a2capt]

If it comes like I fixed it, I'll even put it on a tree!

[Eclipse]

That's friggin' hideous.   I hope it's not one of the items you consider to be "pretty sharp".

It's not - I was talking about the new coins and a few other things.

[gunguy]

http://caphistory.blogspot.com/2010_04_01_archive.html

[gunguy]

"The winning entry in Civil Air Patrol's contest seeking a theme or logo, or both, for the 2011 Annual Conference has been selected. The winner receives free registration for the conference"

http://www.capvolunteernow.com/news.cfm/logo_unveiled_for_2011_annual_conference_70th_cap_anniversary?show=news&newsID=10407

[DakRadz]

Wow.

It looks cheesy and I don't particularly care for it, regardless of TTT.

Now I'm off to find the Capt.'s email so as to inform him he is paying for my registration, since I had to look at this.

[a2capt]

Thats old already, but still gross. Sad that is all the talent pool could come up with. It does look cheesy. Though I'm of the opinion that whats dragging it down for me is TTT.

[Persona non grata]

Cool......I can wear it on my uniform?

[arajca]

Thats old already, but still gross. Sad that is all the talent pool could come up with. It does look cheesy. Though I'm of the opinion that whats dragging it down for me is TTT.

Perhaps it was an unwritten requirement that that THING be used in the logo.

[a2capt]

Unwritten. IE - the 'judges' just threw out any entries devoid of TTT.

I swear, that thing is just plain hideous. It's a product of someone had too much leeway, and probably good intentions, but created that thing without regards to consistency, and then they had the chutzpah to put it on the cover of the magazine for a few issues. Ug-ly. Because someone wanted something 'cute' for some conference, and now we're stuck with the hideous thing. It pays pretty much zero heritage to our organization. It serves to further dilute the pool of recognition, if anything. Maybe whoever did it got the idea after being stuck behind a farm implement, or Amish buggy on a two lane switch back road in the mountains with a double yellow down the middle.

[Jill]

chutzpah...LOL

[JC004]

I think that more people should add the anti-TTT thing to their forum signature.  Just saying.

[SarDragon]

Well, I'm getting bored with mine, so it will likely get replaced in the next few days.

[sardak]

The agenda is out for next month's NEC meeting. The ad-hoc committee on TTT will be presenting its report under old business.

Mike

[JC004]

Well, I'm getting bored with mine, so it will likely get replaced in the next few days.

You made yours.  Perhaps you should try a different one.

[SarDragon]

Well, I'm getting bored with mine, so it will likely get replaced in the next few days.

You made yours.  Perhaps you should try a different one.

Nope. I snatched it from someone else. Don't recall who. It's gonna be history shortly.

[a2capt]

The stupid ugly thug isn't going anywhere.. Not at the rate of acceptance and ignoration of the current style gui.. Oh, snap! There isn't one.

So their first order of business will be to get some form of official recognition for this ...thing... and that becomes the first entry in their now publication.

There is *nothing* wrong with the roundel. Nothing. If we need another one, it should be a committee item, and the rules should be nothing integrated from the past ones, otherwise, why do we need a new one?

That 70th anniversary logo is not going on anything I have any involvement in for our December open house.

[Grumpy]

The stupid ugly thug isn't going anywhere.. Not at the rate of acceptance and ignoration of the current style gui.. Oh, snap! There isn't one.

So their first order of business will be to get some form of official recognition for this ...thing... and that becomes the first entry in their now publication.

There is *nothing* wrong with the roundel. Nothing. If we need another one, it should be a committee item, and the rules should be nothing integrated from the past ones, otherwise, why do we need a new one?

That 70th anniversary logo is not going on anything I have any involvement in for our December open house.

Shame on you!  What are you doing on CAP Talk when you should be studying hard at NSC.  Get back to work son.

[Spiritsoar]

[RiverAux]

Well, prepare for a massive influx of cadets since we're not using one of those scary military symbols there....