It is my opinion, and always has been since entering the Cosmos Hub, that the Ø logo has a cleaner, more professional and sophisticated aesthetic appeal than that of the current official Atom logo.
Would anyone else be in favour of adopting the Ø logo as the official Atom and/or Cosmos Hub logo?
Update: I actually really like the additional ideas below from Guinch and Trave 
I’m firmly in favor of aligning the Cosmos logo with the Cosmos Hub logo, but there’s a real issue: the current Cosmos logo doesn’t clearly represent an atom.
I think the solution should go the other way, bringing the Cosmos logo closer to the Atom identity, but with a refined, more modern, professional, sophisticated and institutional-looking version of the atom. Visually, this would signal a clear intention to align the broader Cosmos vision with the Hub, and vice versa, which is essential for long-term success.
This aligns Cosmos and its currency, Atom, directly within the name itself, much more meaningful than the slashed “Ø,” which doesn’t convey anything specific.
That actually looks really good. And I agree about having a meaningful symbol. Maybe it’s just blue shaded background that I don’t like lol
I think I like how the white looks more, but black would be more representative of how things actually are in the cosmos with blackness and bright objects within…and it also looks really good too!
I like the white. It is more visible. Dark theme = great visibility . white theme = more visible than now ^^ = win win
@Guinch_Roze @Cosmic_Pwranger The designs actually look great, and I agree that a visual upgrade makes sense at some point. However, from an investor and governance perspective, timing is everything.
Right now, we have massive utility drivers and critical technical proposals on the table (like the infrastructure being polished by the builders). Diverting governance bandwidth, community attention, and effort toward a cosmetic rebranding at this exact moment feels like a distraction.
We have much more important things to do first. Let’s focus all our energy on executing, launching, and voting on the core infrastructure and utility proposals. Once the house is fully built and generating real value, then we can worry about painting it. Priorities first.
That’s a good idea. I think doing it at the same time as the tokenomics changes would make the most sense probably. Imagine looking all fresh and getting people all excited for big things just to find out that it’s just cosmetics (actually no pun intended) 
But if we did it at the same time it would help draw attention to the fact that some changes have been implemented! 
@Cosmic_Pwranger Ah, I see your point. I strongly agree with the strategy of using the new logo as a marketing trigger to announce that the “engine upgrade” is finally live.
However, we need to be very direct about the order of execution and timing: first things first. The core technical development and tokenomics must be fully secured before we introduce cosmetic decisions into the mix. We cannot allow logo debates to get in the way of the developers, add unnecessary friction, or delay the critical projects ATOM needs to push forward right now. Design work must happen strictly in the background.
Core fundamentals first, aesthetics second, and once the important stuff is locked in, launching them together as a package is a solid move. Good idea!
What are your thoughts if the white on Black would have more of a shimmer or shine to it? I kind of like the glowing one tbh
Also I’m not trying to distract anyone or push this immediately. But I’m not very technical, so I’m talking about what interests me and what I can contribute to. Plus, if we want to ship it with/after some other stuff it should be ready to go when the other stuff ships! So some people ought to be talking about it
I prefer my versions, in the sense that the light flares look more like unwanted artifacts.
That said, there’s probably something interesting to explore with a subtle touch of brightness, but I’m worried it could easily become too much.
If we agree on this direction, I’ll post a proposal for updating the branding across the forum and the website.
Then the only thing left will be agreeing on the logo for CoinGecko, etc .. imo ? 
I mean, it’s not like we’re changing the logo, like I originally suggested. So I don’t see why it has to be a big deal. It’s just some aesthetic upgrades which will attract more eyes…
YEAH full agree here, lets try something.
And it is just kind of confusing that this Cosmos Hub forum has the CL branding instead of the Cosmos Hub branding, isn’t it?
I like this direction more than merging like I originally posted.
Meanwhile, the logo is 20% brighter with 10% more brilliance and shine, enhancing its visibility across various explorers, brokers, and similar platforms.
That’s less intrusive than my sparkles were which was an initial thought I had as well… I love it!
For real that looks amazing!!!
Also GGE must airdrop 100 atoms to you for this work, it’s soooooo good.
I would also just like to point out on here as well that black was chosen for the background of the logo on the official Telegram channel. So I think it’s pretty agreed upon that black or white looks better than the current navy. If nothing else comes of this right now, I don’t see why we couldn’t at least change the background for our token logo so that it looks more appealing to the eye!
