DaGeek247@fedia.io 13 hours ago Like would you give a second glance at choosing something like UwU.jajaja.lol or whatever for your antivirus? It puts out "we don't take this seriously" vibes and that translates to "you shouldn't take us seriously either", which doesn't mech well with a serious software function.
Yes. Currently my office uses a tool called "keep ass" as the primary password database management tool.
If a company can't look past a cartoon mascot, it is best, for the developer of the tool, that company never actually uses the tool in the first place.
You can stop a lot of assholes at the door by putting a rainbow by the door handle. This is the same, and it's working as intended.
ParlimentOfDoom@piefed.zip 13 hours ago
Again, nothing to do with assholes.
And the P is capitalized, so the software is not presenting itself as keep ass. Would your company use that software if it actually was? With a cartoon butt as the logo, not a key?
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I don't live in that world, so I don't know. My previous employer used it too. It's kinda the standard for password management, just like anubis is. (which has a normal name and silly logo, as opposed to keepass which has a silly name and normal logo).
A butt is not the same as an animal person at all. The fact that you compared a cartoon mascot like Anubis' to a cartoon butt says more about you than it does this conversation. Cartoon animal people as mascots is older than the internet by a mile.
ParlimentOfDoom@piefed.zip 12 hours ago
You brought up butts. My point with going to an extreme with that is even you can agree there is a line somewhere where something shifts over the line of “too ridiculous to consider for serious purposes”.
You not understanding that, and trying to reframe my argument as equating mascots to butts, says a lot about you. It’s also less of a logo and more on the standard of a generic social media profile picture that I’m no way relates to the product.
No I didn't. You did. It's right above my comment. Don't lie. Everybody can see you mentioning butts first.
And my point is that "too ridiculous to consider for serious purposes" being the current state of things is wrong and needs to change to allow for less serious things to exist.
There is a conflict here. There are at least three options to resolve it. Either the company needs to change, anubis needs to change, or the users complaining about the other two groups need to change.
I'm arguing that the company is wrong for not changing. I'm also arguing that the user is wrong for complaining about anubis' branding. Hell, I'm even arguing that anubis is right for choosing to skip out on mainstream branding.
In short, I'm saying that anubis is nowhere near crossing that line.