I would like to put out a call to the organisers of the 2018 STEEM Silver Round design competition, @phelimint, @sevinwilson, and whoever else is coordinating the process of selecting and getting the coin made.
There seems to be some contention with the original design of the @dandesign86 coin (No 26) which was originally displayed with a STEEM logo punched through the coin. That coin was awesome, and drew a lot of votes early on. Many people would have voted base on the image, and not necessarily the information about the punch hole possibly not being an option. With the news that it is not within the capacity of the mint to produce such a coin, and having to face the design with a filled in, or deep logo, the design has been compromised, and what was the central feature of the coin is no longer there.
Is The First Voting Round a Fair Result?
I fear that the new design is far inferior, and that perhaps many people would not have voted for the coin in its revised design (without the punch-through logo), and that the result of this round of voting has been skewed by this.
This is not the coin we're voting for, but many of us did:
This is one of the options, but we had already voted for the first. If The above coins wins, we may get this one:
A second round of voting is needed
I would like to propose a second round of voting, whereby the top 5 coins (nos 26, 21, 1, 12, and 14) from the first round go through to be rejudged in their final design which would go through to the mint for production. If the coin is indeed "THE ONE" then it will stand the test of the second round of voting, and be re-inforced as the people's choice for 2018.
Personally, I love the original design of the @dandesign86 coin, and would love to see it come to fruition, even at another mint. Perhaps as a 2 ounce special release, with all costs covered through pre-orders. I would buy one or two of those for sure! I like the compromise design too. I don't think it's all that bad.
I just don't think the revised coin can be counted as being the contender in the first round of voting, given that the coin design was represented by what is not going to be the final product. This is not an attack on anyone, or the coin itself. I know the hole-punched coin should be the stand-out winner by far, but it was really never in contention as a viable production piece.
We need to make sure we get the 2018 coin 100% right, and it is really the people's choice. The only way I can see this happening fairly is by a second round of voting with the absolute final coin design up for being produced presented at the start of voting. Rather take the extra week to get confirmation from the people, than make a decision based on a coin which is not the one which was originally voted for. The voting is pretty close, so this may not be necessary in the end if the winning coin is indeed the actual coin going to the mint for production.
Either way, I am buying a coin or three when they come out... I'm not fussed which coin wins, only that it wins in its final form.
Thanks for your consideration, I know you'll do what's best for everyone.
My awesome UpboKs by @ryihvnn