I could personally second this as I mainly drive my choices by what things/people do. Not what they look like. Unfortunately I have to admit that this isn’t the way world mainly runs. How many people live (finely) with a sh***y software/appliance because of good marketing/branding? Obviously a super good looking logo will bring more people to FreeCAD. Knowing if this would be kind of people interesting in discussing/contributing is another question (I know you know what I think of that 
).
I also think when comparing interest in logo vs. icons, fame & pride should be took into account. Guys that drew Tux or Wilber got their names somewhere. Not the ones that drew the icons. 
Is that a bad shortcut to consider that ones that are sensitive to how things look like, also generally care of their egos?
These are very good points. We use FreeCAD not because it’s Free (money-wise), but because it gives us Freedom, because it’s Open source, community built. However the word “Free” primarily indicates purchase value, and it’s what people associate it with, because that’s a full word in front of the word CAD. Whereas ‘FCAD’ could potentially mean Freedom CAD (but probably could also be associated with profanity)
Either way, I think campaigning for a name change is a lost cause, as it would require too many resources that FreeCAD doesn’t and will never have (as things start to pile up)
You’ve just dismissed the whole sector of Design (Product Design, UI/UX, Graphic Design)
There are people who appreciate aesthetics and people who are impartial to it. There are almost no people who HATE what’s universally considered good aesthetics. And people who do appreciate aesthetics want everything to look nice, because 1kg of poop can ruin 100kg of jam. And it’s not because of their ego, or because they’re too succeedable to marketing.
I said “successful” projects, I mean famous and large scale used. Maybe FreeBSD it’s a valid exception, ok, but I repeat that’s because in English free mean a lot more the in other languages, and that’s a problem. “Free”, unfortunately, is intentend “for free” in the real world, not free as “liber” (Latin), that’s why IMHO it’s not good to be in the name.
FCAD it’s only a suggestion, of course.
Maybe the project leaders haven’t acted a logo suggestion because they’re waiting for one to be ‘universally considered good’. I doubt that will ever happen because it is too much a matter of taste.
Here’s another unpopular opinion: I think we should categorically reject any logo not designed in FreeCAD. Flame on.
I know, and of course I don’t want to start a campaingn to change the name, it was only an “unsolicided” and “free” (free as in speech, not a free beer 
) suggestion
Maybe the project leaders haven’t acted a logo suggestion because they’re waiting for one to be ‘universally considered good’. I doubt that will ever happen because it is too much a matter of taste.
There’s voting.
Here’s another unpopular opinion: I think we should categorically reject any logo not designed in FreeCAD. Flame on.
???
While we’re at it, let’s use a bicycle for a ladder.
Do you really think that’ll put an end to the issue?
???
While we’re at it, let’s use a bicycle for a ladder.
Why the patronizing tone? I already said it was an unpopular opinion.
My point is that the design exists in an ecosystem. What if I want to incorporate a logo inside a design file, say for a milling vise. Logos designed in other tool are more limiting for further FreeCAD work.
Logos designed IN FreeCAD have more intrinsic value TO FreeCAD
Sorry, didn’t mean to sound patronising. I just wanted to properly express my confusion about the statement.
Most logos are designed using vector graphics. We have different vector exchange formats that are universally acceptable and usable, such as SVG.
You can import any SVG and save it in FreeCAD, call it made in FreeCAD? Or am I missing something here?
Depends on the logo, a 2D design like this one is probably better done on inkscape, if you want to use it in FreeCAD you can easily import the svg, for those 3D like designs I would agree they should make it in FreeCAD too, however I’m against 3D like logos in general, they’re not good for small sizes.
No you’re not. But SVGs are 2D even when they’re communicating 3D information. If I’m modeling a 3D object and want to use elements of the SVG, I have to recreate that 3D data.
Going the other way is actually easier. I could model a 3D logo (Well not me. My artistic skills suck) but someone could model a 3D logo and export a 2D SVG. The logo source files would still be available if someone wanted to use them that way.
Wow, 4 pages of comments. It looks like the logo Is becoming a hot topic!
That’s a hint that the proposed design Is good!
I think you miss the 45 pages of comment of logo discussion here:
https://www.forum.freecadweb.org/viewtopic.php?f=34&t=28941
I think this thread too can be merged there
That is where logos go to die. 
It’s like the suggestions box at the local government building.
For logo discussions to have any structure of sense, there needs to be a threaded discussion with upvotes/downvotes/comments for each, sort of reddit style. And all those discussions should lead to something, so there needs to be a deadline where something is decided.
The current FreeCAD logo should be a part of that contest.
Maybe we should start by a vote/discussion about changing or not the logo ? 
[troll] Oh ! and the winner must change all FreeCAD icons according to his new logo design 
[/troll]
Yes, please, can you? I think we are at the good point of the development cycle for such a task.
That’s actually a great idea, the first one. But that would need to be done in a very objective way.
Oh ! and the winner must change all FreeCAD icons according to his new logo design >
That’s okay, we’ll just overwrite old FreeCAD.ico with new FreeCAD.ico. Job’s done.