Re: [GFD] Wonderful sense of humor: "Stalin One" font

The same way Google should pull down that "Innocence of Muslims" video?

Well it's an interesting issue :) I'm not sure what 'side' i'm on, but, isn't the name 'warranted' in that the font is supposed to resonate some sort of pulp fictional / comic book typography of a jackbooted dystopia of some dark "Stalinist' future. That's how i see it. Kind of obvious i thought, and i'm not sure that's offensive, as such. No more offensive than such diverse pop artifacts as The Red Skull, the comics of Alexey Lipatov, or Antony Hegarty's song 'Hitler in my Heart'.

-v

Similarly, a few years ago I digitized images of "Arbeit Macht Frei" into a font for a friend of mine to use in her project.  Would that also be offensive if released?

I have forwarded to Jovanny Lemonad your email, and my own suggestion
to rename the font, and I'll let the list know his response.

In my personal opinion, it matters that the font's creators _are_
Russian, c.f. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reappropriation

I don’t think that this matters. Not only because two individuals don’t
represent all Russians but also because many of Mr. Chugashvili’s
victims were of other nationalities.
Reappropriation is in my opinion not a good argument for this case. Who
should reappropriate this single person’s name? One Russian? All
Russians? Georgians? Communists? Putin?

Hi font guys!

I was somewhat surprised by the position of Adam, but I will try to convey to you their point of view.

My great-grandfather fought in the war and my grandfather fought in the war, which is staged by Hitler and Stalin. My grandfather eventually died after the war from a severe concussion. We in Russia are so many people who have relatives fought in the period 1941-1945. But we are not ashamed to say Stalin hearing. Yes, Stalin was a murderer, Stalin - a dictator. But besides that in Stalin's Russia is associated with grandeur, architecture and strength of the people. If you've ever been to Russia, I'm sure you understand.

This can be compared with the fact that, for example, the Russian people do not understand why the U.S. attacks on Iraq and Afghanistan. But it is not our business and we take it in their stride.

I am ready to rename this at any other name - this is no problem. But the fact that the font was originally called the Metro, we were forbidden to use the name. And there was Stalin.

If you have any idea how to convey the spirit of Moscow at the end of the 21st century, how to convey the greatness of the Russian people, I am pleased to accept your offer.

понедельник, 17 сентября 2012 г., 3:10:37 UTC+4 пользователь Adam Twardoch написал:

Jovanny: 'If you have any idea how to convey the spirit of Moscow [...]'

'Spirit of Moscow' is perhaps an option?

FEB

What about:
* Truman Hiroshima & Nagasaki
* Churchill Starved India
* De Gaulle 1 Million Martyrs Algeria

They would be good additions to the nice list.

Why not name the font after one of Stalin's archetypal killing machines of the 1930s, the T-26 tank??
hmm "T-26" ?? Now would that be just as tasteless as "Stalin"??
-v

A name like "Stalinist Gothic" could be less problematic while keeping
the reference to the style.

--
Denis Moyogo Jacquerye

Now that's a wonderful suggestion.

For example, in East Berlin or Warsaw, "Stalinist" is commonly used as a
reference to architecture built during Stalin's rule.

Basically, I don't believe that these kinds of names or terms should be
"banned" in any way. But as long as the direct victims of the crimes or
their direct descendants live, it's a sensitive issue.

In my original sarcastic e-mail, I referred to the fact that by using
the name "Stalin" without a defined context, it's not at all clear what
the intention is. With fonts, it's much more difficult. People don't
read readmes etc. So some people can truly take offence because they
assume it's glorification. By the nature of its sensitivity, it'd
require context, a comment. And that context is difficult to express in
a font selection UI -- fonts aren't works of art per se, although they
can be. But they're usually deployed in a utilitarian context.

Basically, using font names like "Stalin" or "Hitler" is no less
problematic than using font names like "Fuck Gothic" or "Cunt Italic".
This CAN be done, but there are consequences attached to it. Some people
won't find it funny if they see the word "Fuck" in their font menu.

I personally don't care -- so my sarcasm was really intended to draw
your attention to it and to provoke a bit. :D If it was for me
personally, you could have collapsing twin towers and burning Bibles and
crosses as animated dingbats. But -- perhaps somewhat unfortunately --
this kind of stuff does not belong to a mainstream product. Google Web
Fonts is a mainstream product.

On top of that, an entry like "Stalin is a trademark of..." is just
grotesque :D

Denis's suggesion is really much better: "Stalinist Gothic" would work,
I think. At least when I try to empathize with others who might be
offended, my gut and experience tells me that "Stalinist Gothic" would
be by miles not as potentially offensive as "Stalin One".

Best,
Adam

--

May success attend your efforts,
-- Adam Twardoch
(Remove "list." from e-mail address to contact me directly.)

I agree with Adam's new post and his points have been very well put.

Khaled, I would not want to name fonts after these folks either. Add Jonas Savimbi, Saddam Hussein, Jean Kambanda, Suharto and on and on. Naming longer and longer lists of deplorable villains ( and you could unfortunately go on for quite a long time ) doesn't change Adam's point.

I would also argue that Youtube is not like the font menu. Youtube which is more or less an open portal like Google docs. I would not suggest that it is a good idea to police what people write in Google docs or what is on Your tude except where there is a legal compulsion to do so. In contrast to this Google webfonts and the names of Google web fonts actually do have the appearance of having been officially accepted in some way by Google. They seem more official by dint of appearing in a menu. They are different.

So while I agree that on some level inherently silly to be offended by whatever ( again an endless list... ) it is still a risk and a unneeded risk to the Google brand to simply name a font Stalin. Go there if you want but don't be surprised if there is blowback. And further don't be surprised if arguments about 'appropriation' however potentially valid are somehow above the grade level of the folks who get upset.

I am glad that "Stalinist Gothic" was suggested. It is a very clever solution. I hope that either it or some other name suggestive of Russian grandeur is eventually chosen.

-e.

Hi Jovanny!

So, 'Spirit of Moscow' or 'Stalinist Gothic' or something else, what
do you pick?

Cheers
Dave

Adam, you know how it is. Type designers live boring lives. We all
need a little bit of excitement on a Sunday afternoon.

Thank you for suggesting a name change in advance of anyone actually
complaining, I agree with your and Eben's point that a font menu name
lacks context and it might be offensive to some in a mainstream
product -- so worth renaming proactively.

Alas...

-e.

Dave Crossland: 'So, 'Spirit of Moscow' or 'Stalinist Gothic' or
something else [...]'

I like Eben's 'Russian Grandeur' too.

FEB

Hi!

I spoke to Jovanny after he spoke to the other designer, and the other
designer is still very keen on that name.

However, they will compromise:

- On their blog and website, they'll use the original font name "Stalin"

- For the audience of the Google Web Fonts project, they will use the name
flipped backwards: Nilats / Nilats One

"I think this is a decision that was given to us is very difficult,
will suit all parties."


Cheers
Dave

I think spelling it backwards is a really bad idea. It makes it look like Google us trying to hide something. :(

Dave: '[...] they will use the name flipped backwards: Nilats [...]'

I think that Nilats perfectly conveys the spirit of Wocsom and the
greatness of the Naissur people.

FEB

I still don't see that naming a font 'Stalin' is in any way an endorsement of the man or what he did.
Whether it's a name that web designers will be attracted to / repulsed by, is another matter.
-v

Vernon: 'I still don't see that naming a font 'Stalin' is in any way
an endorsement of the man or what he did.'

Also prizes are usually just arbitrarily named after people
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_prizes_named_after_people).

FEB

I agree. This seems dubious at best.

-e.

> Google is trying to hide something. :(

Umm, what is being hidden? :-)
Nilats will not cause any offence on a context-less font menu, and it
is what the type designer wishes to call their font.

This seems further than "Stalinist Gothic".

Adam, since you raised this topic, I wonder if you can weigh in.

BTW http://www.google.com/webfonts/specimen/Stalin+One should now
start 404ing (will take up to 24 hours to fully propagate this change)
and it won't appear in the Developer API or font menu of integrating
apps.

But it's a font being named 'Stalin', not a Prize awarded for qualities embodied by a particular person. I see a fonts as 'low / pop culture' products, compared to your example of 'Awards', or 'professional prizes'. Fonts are in the same league as songs, paintings, fashion, etc; activities that we expect can produce edgy or difficult products. If atypi were awarding a 'Stalin Prize' for services to Russian typography, then it would clearly be a different situation. Fyi in the Soviet Union there was a Stalin Prize, awarded between 1950-54, for Science & Arts, and the even more shamefully named, Stalin Peace Prize (1950-55).
On a further sidetrack, i am curious to know what typeface names were used during the darkest eras of the Soviet Union.

-v

Vernon: 'I see a fonts as "low / pop culture" products [...]'

Unfortunately there are a lot of fonts that fit your view, but in my
world typefaces and subsequently typography are representations of
mankind's most sophisticated achievements.

FEB

Frank,

Well i see 'low / pop culture' artifacts as some of mankind's most sophisticated achievements. And, some of the most beautiful type that man has produced was surely the result of normal people pursuing their day-to-day craft, not the result of grandious gestures elevated to lofty heights way above the masses.
-v

To paraphrase Thomas Astle's first two lines from his introduction to
'The Origin and Progress of Writing, [...] (London, 1784):

The noblest acquisition of mankind is Speech, and the most useful art
is Typography. The first, eminently distinguishes Man from the brute
creation; the second, from uncivilized savages.

FEB

Vernon: 'Well i see "low / pop culture" artifacts as some of mankind's
most sophisticated achievements.'

Obviously we live in parallel universes.

FEB

That sort of twaddle was typical of much English eighteenth century pumped up writing. Usually, like Astle, the purpose of these writings was to flatter, gain favour with, and ultimately extract money from The King. Basically, they wrote whatever the aristocracy wanted to believe of their victorious and civilising Empire.
:)

-v

On 19 September 2012 12:25, Frank E. Blokland
LOL

So, has for example, all folk art, or vernacular architecture been removed from your universe? You betta build a spacecraft quickly. Your missing out ;)

Vernon: 'Usually, like Astle, the purpose of these writings was to
flatter, gain favour with, and ultimately extract money from The King.'

I assume you read another book with the same title. The Origin of
Writing [..] is in my opinion quite an achievement.

So, when it comes to everything that is covered by the subject
'Wonderful sense of humor: "Stalin One" font' I disagree with all of
your statements so far, and I probably will disagree with everything
you will come up further with. So, it is time for me to watch some
Champion League's soccer now ;-)

FEB

Vernon: 'Who do you follow?'

Manchester United vs. Galatasaray

I am watching TV, so don't disturb me!

FEB

IMHO, if some people find a font named Stalin offensive, they will be
much much more offended when they discover the “hidden” name, with the
addition of all sorts of conspiracy theories, and I’m telling from some
experience here.

Regards,
Khaled

“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that ‘my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.’”
 —Isaac Asimov

I'll ask Jovanny again.

--
Cheers
Dave

Dave,

The idea of using "Nilats" instead of "Stalin" is even worse than the
original idea. Neo-Nazis around the world use the number "18" as a code
for "AH" (1st and 8th letter of the alphabet) = "Adolf Hitler". "Nilats"
might fit nicely into the same tradition -- and some people can
interpret it as that very maneuver.

Jovanny posted about the controversy on his Russian-language blog:
http://lemonad.livejournal.com/163397.html

Here's my translation (reasonably accurate) of his post into English:

== START ==

Just three days after publication, the international typographic
community objected to the name "Stalin" and are forcing me to rename the
font. Fuck this, really. Remember, last year some people wanted to sue me.

Here's the quote: [Here my sarcastic e-mail is quoted].

Western designers are damn conservatives. I tell them about the culture,
they tell me about a dictator. I tell them about the architecture, they
told me about the murderer. I don't ask them what the hell the U.S.
troops are doing in Iraq and Afghanistan. We're not supposed to care.

We can choose two paths:
1. Tell the international community to go fuck themselves and protect
our own cultural code.
2. Succumb to the international community and rename the font (which is
principally easy).

We'll probably end up renaming the font. Please suggest new names for
the font in the comments. I promise, if I like the name, I'll start
using it right away in the font.

Until then: get the Stalin font here as long as it's not in the store [GWF].

== END ==

Some comments under the blog post (translated by me):

== START ==

* This is fucking incredible. Pardon the expression of course.

* Jovanny, fuck all that Hitler's and Beria's family -- let them eat it.
* Call it Zensur. First, it's as angular as Stalin, second, it means
"censorship" in German

* True, you should rename it.

* I would spit in their faces, but I don't know the details so I won't
advise it to others.

* What would be the reason why you would have to rename it?
[Jovanny] Well, since it's sort of "humor" and no serious person would
call a font after a blood-spilling dictator.

* Dictator, maybe dictator, but if it weren't for the reaction and will
of this bad criminal, of the Soviet Union, and along with them, of whole
Europe -- there wouldn't have been a chance. The name is strong. Defend
it. You'll make a name for yourself for that you did not give in.

* What the hell. The difference is in the perception. The more because
the name is actually quite fitting. I would be renamed it to Gulag, for
example, but I suspect that this too will cause streams of shit. The
very delicate nature would require to write an explanation.

* Name it Solovki, but they won't get it, I guess. After all, how much
should we really rename? There is no chance to educate people that
Stalin was an ambiguous person. But overall, I'd also be against calling
it Hitler. I wouldn't mind Trotsky though, what difference does it make
if he had done the prototype -- if it conveys the principle?

[Jovanny] I've done the work but there is no effect. They think somewhat
differently, the marketing manager responsible for GWF.

* It's purely my personal opinion that the name should be left as is.
All these rantings are just hypocrisy and at attempt to impose their
pagan views on us. It's the same as with YouTube which did not remove
the anti-prophet video which caused the entire Islamic world to uproar
(democracy they say, blah blah blah), but they banned our film "Holy
war", with film chronicles from World War II, where Nazis were hunted
and their flags were smashed against the walls of the Kremlin. They did
that because, allegedly, the Nazi symbols and propaganda could offend
someone. It would probably offend those Nazis who are not quite dead
yet, supposedly someone this video may offend. Stalin -- this is indeed
an era. And the font reflects its unique aesthetic. If we were to find a
different name, it should be reminiscent of the era. The first five-year
plan, I don't know. But I understand that it would be difficult to
enclose in the name of a font.

[Jovanny] Thank you for your opinion, I fully agree with you.

* The author of the quoted English text is sick.

* The fact that the author of the quoted text is sick is not depressing.
It's depressing that such imbecils have a right to vote in this matter.

[Jovanny] They're Westerners. If they see a hint of something, then for
them it is reality.

== END ==

There are, overall, 130 comments. Most of them are laments about "them",
"Westerners", and about an attempt of censorship. And if there's some
voices supporting the renaming, they're mostly because "we need to give
in if we want to be in the club" [of the international typographic
community]. It's a bit sad, but I understand it.

Of course, my "sarcastic" text was somewhat strong, so I guess it's time
for me to tune into the discussion there, and try to explain my view in
some friendly words.

After all, in the "international typographic community", we don't want
censorship, we don't want people to feel frustrated, and we don't want
shouting. We do want dialogue. So I'll try that.

I'll let you know what comes out of it.

Best,
Adam

--

May success attend your efforts,
-- Adam Twardoch
(Remove "list." from e-mail address to contact me directly.)

Interesting that Jovanny didn't mention that there seemed to be consensus that calling it "Stalinist Gothic" would be fine. I'd add that even calling it "Stalinist One" would probably be okay. These names acknowledge without seeming to glorify.

I think "Stalinist Gothic" or "Stalinist Sans" (if it is a Sans) is still the best compromise I have heard.

-e.

Hi Jovanny, Adam, and the group,

On 17 September 2012 01:57, jovanny <lem...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If you have any idea how to convey the spirit of Moscow at the end of the
> 21st century, how to convey the greatness of the Russian people, I am
> pleased to accept your offer.

Would "Stalinist One" be okay?

Cheers
Dave

I'm glad you say that.

This probably means that you don't have anyone in the family who was
executed by Stalin's people or who died of TB in a gulag.

Concern yourself lucky! :)

Cheers,
Adam

List members,

I've posted a Russian version of the text quoted below to the
LiveJournal blog discussion on the topic. We'll see what the comments
generate there.

Best,
Adam


== START ==
Dear friends & readers,

"The sick quoted author" -- it's me.

I wrote the text quoted by Jovanny in an attempt to show how somebody
could interpret certain words if the context is not known. Jovanny
quoted my words here, and we can all read the comments now. I think that
the thinking presented in my words offended some of you.

I think that this proves at least one point: if the context is not
clear, certain words can offend.

Fact is that personally, I don't care if Google Web Fonts has a font
named Stalin One. And I don't have any influence over their decision
making.

But I still don't think it's a good idea to publish a font named Stalin
One, especially not on Google Web Fonts.

First off: I'm from Poland. In a way, this makes me a Westerner. I live
in Berlin, which makes me a Westerner as well. Every day, I work with
Russians, Germans, Polish people, Americans. I have friends who are
German, Russian, English, Bulgarian, Czech, Ukrainian, Armenian, Polish,
Lebanese, Iranian, Spanish. What does this make me?

I once even received a medal from the Ministry of Culture of the Russian
Federation for contributions to the development of the Cyrillic
alphabet. I'm very proud of it.

Are fonts artistic expressions? Yes. Should any artist be free to
express whatever they like? Absolutely!

Are fonts products? Some fonts are. Should any market accept any kind of
products, whatever the name is? Let's think about it.

Imagine the following examples. They are, of course, exaggerated and
provocative, to make a strong point.

1. Microsoft introduces Windows 9 and in the Russian language version,
all font samples are rendered with the text "Владислав IV was the best
Russian tsar in history, Russia deserves no better.".

2. Google Maps has no information about Russia at all. "Unknown
country", it says.

Would you think it's funny? Some of you probably would. Would some
Russian people be offended? Probably. After all, even my words in the
quoted text offended some people here.

As an artist, you can make such statements, you can choose whatever you
want to do. But if you make products which are available globally, you
need to
consider what you are doing, you need to be responsible for your actions.

So the question is: is the Stalin One font an artistic expression or is
it also a product?

Inside the font file, there is this information:
"Stalin is a trademark of Alexey Maslov and Jovanny Lemonad."

I think that sufficiently answers the above question.

Also: Google Web Fonts is not an art gallery. It's a collection of
commercial products. They don't cost money, but they're treated as
products, for example, they are added to Google Docs, which is a
commercial product.

I think some people can be offended if they click on their list of fonts
and they see "Stalin", "Hitler", or "Pol Pot" there, just as they would
be offended if they saw "Fuck", "Cunt" or "Piss off".

You could say: well, it's because people don't understand the context
why the font is named Stalin.

Precisely!

I personally understand the context very well. I like the design,
although I would be happier if the font included not only the Latin
characters for "Westerners" (ä, é or ß) but also the letters for the
"Slavic brothers" (ą, č or ł) or for Baltic languages. It seems that I
am not quite so "Western" after all.

Berlin or Warsaw are full of art and architecture created in the 1950s,
in the "Stalinist era". Some hate this art and architecture, because for
them it invokes bad memories, and they treat these works as an
expression of support for the suppresive ideology. Others can separate
it: they can look at the art or architecture in its pure form, they can
appreciate it and abstract of the ideology.

The same is true with Nazi art and architecture. The Tempelhof airport
buildings in Berlin are fantastic, impressive and beautiful. They were
built by Albert Speer, Hitler's chief architect. But I many people would
be offended if it was called "Hitler's airport" today.

Stalin was a complex personality. He was a mass murderer, and he boosted
the Soviet economy. So was Hitler. He started World War II, but he also
contributed to the technological development of Europe. He built
railways, highways and many other things.

Should the great things that people do somehow be calculated against the
bad things that people do, and at the end, we just count the balance?

Maybe. It's a topic for a great debate. A debate among people who know
and understand the context. A debate between people who want the debate.

Should all this be encapsulated in one short name of a font?

I don't think that this can work. You need context, you need explanations.

The world would be a wonderful place if there was no fear, no bad
feelings, no frustration. If people did not get insulted easily.

But people do get insulted easily. And Stalin's name, put out there
without the context, can be insulting.

Because if you see a name of a font on a list, you don't know the
context, and it's not easy to find out about the "author's intentions".
Because it's a product. You see it in the font menu. You use it.
Primarily, it's not art. How many people who use Verdana in Word would
read the story behind it?

Again, if Verdana was called Hitler -- I think many people would
protest. Because they wouldn't understand, and because of their own
feelings they would be offended.

Many others wouldn't.

But, as makers of products, should we just do whatever we want to do,
without respecting anybody else?

Once again, about the font name Stalin: Jovanny knows what the context
is, some people here know what the context is, and I think I know what
the context is. But many people never will know it, and they can
actually interpret the context in a completely opposite way.

Some people here said "Stalin was a complex person". I completely agree.
I think, far too complex, to be adequately expressed in a font's name.

Some people here mentioned "us" and "them". "They" would be "the
Westerners", who are ignorant, and if there is a hint of something, they
take it as reality. I'm really really sad that you feel that way.

For me, it's not about "us" and "them" at all, and I think it shouldn't
be about it. Rather than accusing each other of ignorance, I prefer
dialogue.

I hope that, with what I have written above, it'll be easier for you to
make a decision.

Best regards,
Adam Twardoch
== END ==

I actually tabled the issue of Russian audience. I'm not sure whether Adam was interpreted because the Russian language is quite delicate. In particular, I want to clarify that the use of swear words in this case is purely sarcastic undertones, no insults. I want all of you to understand that.


I have received many messages, it's amazing, but half of them should be considered. Ka so this is not my readers. I believe that this is not a question of principle.

Dave, I'm sorry that I always bring to you some problems.
Adam, I hope everything is OK now.

Stalinist one. That's all.


понедельник, 17 сентября 2012 г., 3:10:37 UTC+4 пользователь Adam Twardoch написал:

I see that a new font called "Stalin One" has been added to the GFD repo. Its credits section says: 

Copyright (c) 2009-2011, Alexey Maslov, Jovanny Lemonad (lem...@jovanny.ru), with Reserved Font Name "Stalin"

I greatly appreciate the dark humor of the font's authors. 

I hope that they will follow-up with additional families. My suggestion to names to look at would be: 

* Hitler One

* Beria One

* Goebbels One

* Pol Pot One

to name a few. I also hope that they'll follow up with some additional weights. The light style of Stalin One could be called "Stalin Gulag" and the thin style of Hitler One could be called "Hitler Auschwitz". 

I have an idea for a fantastic April Fool's joke as well: they could release a font with completely blank glyphs without outlines called "Holocaust Zero". 

Dave -- do you think you could forward my suggestions to the font's creators? 

If they like them, I can supply some more. 

Wait! I have one more idea: a font that could commemorate 9/11. The "W" "T" "F" glyphs for a ligature consisting of two vertical bars. The Stylistic Set 1 ("ss01") OpenType feature makes these bars slightly shorter, the Stylistic Set 2 feature makes them even shorter, and so on. Oh, there's the "zero" OpenType feature as well. With that on, the ligature would be completely blank. As in Ground... 

All really wonderful stuff for Alexey and Jovanny to start on, I think -- since they've proven to come up with such creative font naming in the first place, and Google Font Directory seems to have happily chosen to host these fonts without comment. 

Although... alternatively, you *might* think for a while. Perhaps try to guess which Google advertisers might, and which might not share that line of humor? 

Way to go, guys! 

Adam

On 20 September 2012 14:07, jovanny <lem...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Stalinist one

I hope to get this pushed later this month :-)

Jovanny & all,

when I raised this issue, my intention was not to force Jovanny to do
anything *I* would feel is right.

I merely want to draw people's attention to the fact that the name was
*potentially controversial*. I believe that -- as a member of the
typographic community -- it was my obligation to do so.

I thought, it'd be better to do it now than potentially receive some
complaints from infuriated end-users. Of course the style, in which I
did it, was deliberately "colorful" and sarcastic -- as some sort of
"simulation" of what some end-users might do.

In situations like this one, I always assume that a person may not
really be aware of certain potential repercussions of this or that. So
if I see such a situation, I try to advise the person: "watch out, this
may be dangerous". But I firmly believe that in a case like this, it is
not up to me to decide whether any new name, "Stalinist One" or whatever
else it might be, is the "right" one. It's not about my personal taste
or preferences.

Since I could not know how *conscious* Jovanny's naming decision was,
the only thing I wanted to achieve is that Jovanny was alerted that the
name is controversial, that he has a chance to re-think this, and has a
chance to keep it or change it -- whatever he chooses.

My duty as a *member of the typographic community* is done here. I don't
feel like my *personal beliefs* about the matter should influence
Jovanny's decision-making process in any way. Or the decision-making
process within the Google Web Fonts team. It's a matter between Jovanny,
GWF and the potential users of the font.

I never wanted Jovanny of the GWF team to do what *I* want. I want you
guys do what *you* want -- just after having considered potential
consequences.

Within MyFonts, we follow a very similar procedure. Of course, at
MyFonts, I also participate in the process of decision-making as to
whether to remove or to keep a certain font. At Google Web Fonts, it's
other people's jobs.

I trust that all parties have given the matter some consideration and
that they have arrived at a decision that is right for them.

Many thanks for the discussion!

Best,
Adam
> (lem...@jovanny.ru <javascript:>), with Reserved Font Name "Stalin"

Hi!

Thanks again for all your help with the GWF project Adam - will we see
you in Hong Kong or Santa Clara?

Cheers
Dave

On 12-09-21 07:51, vernon adams wrote:

Vernon,
[Sarcasm on] I'm sorry. I must have missed the "fairly obvious" bit.
Perhaps the fact that the font actually has gone live on Google Web
Fonts, I mean got released, confused me. Next time I'll try to be more
alert for "fair obviousness".
Again, please forgive me for not seeing the obvious. Four days ago,
you've written "I'm not sure what 'side' i'm on", and two days ago,
you've written "I still don't see that naming a font 'Stalin' is in any
way an endorsement of the man or what he did". To me, these quotes don't
necessarily indicate that the matter was "obvious" or "clear". I believe
your linguistic dexterity may be a bit beyond my comprehension skills.
[Sarcasm off]

Seriously: I don't see how this issue was clear and obvious from the
very beginning. It got a discussion going here, with some very useful
comments, and some sort of a compromise was worked out.
If we take the famous Germans episode of Fawlty Towers:
"Will you stop talking about the war?"
"Me!? You started it!"
"We did not start it!"
"Yes you did -- you invaded Poland."

I clearly was Basil Fawlty. As I said, I admit it was tactical. Jovanny
got offended, posted on his blog, which resulted in an interesting
discussion.

Reading through that discussion on his Russian-language blog helped me
understand the "back history" better.

I learned that Jovanny thinks that "Western designers are damn
Iraq and Afghanistan.", that "if [Westerners] see a hint of something,
then for them it is reality", and that he "fully agrees" with a
commenter who wrote "All these rantings are just hypocrisy and at
Of course, I don't assume that it's the only thing that he thinks or
believes. But by going emotional, he allowed me to see what his
sensitivity was all about. That helped me understand much better what
was going on. I also consulted with some Russian friends about the issue.

I was able to write a post in Russian there (which I, again, consulted
with some Russian friends, and was told that the text was "very good")
where I explained to Jovanny that I hoped this would help him realize
that if he can get offended by some supposed "Westerner" (me), then
perhaps a font named Stalin can just as easily offend other people. And
I offered, as well as I could, some constructive advice on intercultural
understanding. And of course, I offered "peace", if you will. Some other
Russian commenters tuned in, and the discussion got very civil.

I understand that you "think this whole issue is more FUD than genuine
concern".

I might get terribly offended by your notion that I operate on "Fear,
uncertainty and doubt, [...] a strategic attempt to influence perception
by disseminating negative and dubious or false information. An
individual firm, for example, might use FUD to invite unfavorable
opinions and speculation about a competitor's product; to increase the
general estimation of switching costs among current customers; or to
maintain leverage over a current business partner who could potentially
become a rival." [Wikipedia on FUD].

But I'm not offended. I know what my motivation was. And I appreciate
your comments on the thread.

If I'm now the asshole here, but it got the job done -- I'm fine with
that. :)

Plus, come on, I actually *did* make a genuine attempt on "dark humor".
If Jovanny had gone for my April Fool's idea, I'd never bother him
again, and perhaps I'd even paid for some ads for his Stalin One font!

Cheers,
Adam

...or I would have forked Stalin One, removed the Cyrillic glyphs, added
some weights and Polish diacritics, and published the font as "Moscow
1610" (under OFL, of course). 1610 was when the Polish occupied Moscow.
It was one of only two times in history when Moscow was occupied by
foreign forces.

It could have been fun. Alas, Jovanny decided to give in. Sigh.

:D
A.

Oh, I agree. It's just the question of "if you want to be controversial,
are you ready to take the shitload?". I.e. whether "it's worth it". As I
stated before, it wasn't my intention to force some change. I wanted to
raise the issue and see whether all parties actually were aware of the
potential shit that might hit their fans.

I, personally, am all for controversy. And of course I'll happily take
the shitload if it comes. But it's just me. :)

Thanks!

Best,
Adam