Jambo!
many comments starts with something like "cool", "stylish", "excellent", "nice". And the tips in the contest rules starts with something like "who's the logo for", "must look good as tag line on web site for users", "must look good in different color spaces for screen & print(CMYK vs RGB)" and so on. For me IMHO, that´s like a duck takes the water and not a rare characteristic for a logo. It´s typical and nothing very special. In front of getting "cool", "stylish" and "must look great", it needs a "deep impact".
In the best case, the logo has not to be explained and nevertheless it transmits everything. Everything behind Joomla!. Whatever that may be. For example a symbol like the cross (some of you may excuse me for using the cross, it is for explanation) has not to be explained. It explained itself and everything behind.
Marketing agencies, sometimes especially the professional ones, may tell you all these cool and stylish who´s the logo for things. Because they earn money not only for the "logo concept". They earn money for the "branding strategy" also. And, back to the logo, if the logo explained itself, it brands itself. If it brands itself, it is probably not a really good cash machine.
Any portfolio needs "cash cows". And any portfolio has "poor dogs". Borrowed by Shakespeare: who is the cash cow and who is the poor dog, that´s the question. If i, as a customer, obtain "deep impact", the cash cow is on my side. If i get only "cool and stylish who´s the logo for", the cash cow from the meadow on the other side, is grazing my money. Everytime i have to pay for it, i will try to get some kind of "deep impact".
After careful consideration about "deep impact", i decided to vote for one of the five suggestions. For me personally, the "deep impact" from peek´s hand should have been on "Top". Does not matter. If 'ifs' and 'ans' were pots and pans there were no need of tinkers.
Heko to the Finalists!
Best regards,
Joern