Several years ago they moved from a cartoony demon logo to a more abstract red-sphere-with-two-cones logo precisely to avoid the overtones of the old image. As a fellow Christian, I figured I'd give you the heads up so that you're not lying.

I do agree with you about the name "gimp" and I hope you raise it - it should also be changed.

It does not change the fact that freebsd is under systemic daemon-ism. It's time for a change.

There’s no reason it should be changed. Feel free to name your own projects whatever you like, but don’t impose your tyranny on other people as if it’s the only way to be a healthy and respectful person.

As a former Christian (you should capitalize that) who was raised in religious schools, pictures of the devil and the word "demon" aren't offensive.

"Devils are one of the most common mascots throughout American sports. This can likely be attributed to Christian beliefs being the most common of religions in the U.S."[1]

If anyone should be offended it's the Church of Satan, but they don't mind.

As for "gimp", you're right. Use Glipse. https://glimpse-editor.github.io/

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_symbolism_in_U.S._sp...

> As for "gimp", you're right...

Are you the person who says who can and who cannot feel offended?

I can assert that pictures of the devil are offensive for Christians from Brazil (let's say we're about 150 millions). Unless you meant that only Christians from US should be considered.

As a fellow Brazilian who was not only brought up in a Christian family but have lived most of my life amongst a majority Christian population, I question that since I've never seen anyone being offended by pictures of the devil.

Unless you mean that only Christians from your part of Brazil should be considered.

Hmm, that's strange. I was born and raised by a very conservative Catholic family in Piracicaba/SP -> Juazeiro do Norte/CE -> Piracicaba/SP. I used to be a rocker weirdo that was often scolded by the local community due to my shirts. Catechism classes were a disaster, even that devil woman silhouette with a pointing tail was criticized.

Anyway, even if my experience is actually an exception and even if those conservative Christian people are minorities, would it be ok to offend them?

I mean, I absolutely don't care. But, now that we're revisiting everything to be as political correct as possible, couldn't we change a picture - that is offensive to a minority - to something else?

> I can assert that pictures of the devil are offensive for Christians from Brazil…

I'd find that surprising. Images of the devil have been a mainstay of Christian art for centuries (e.g. "The Temptation of Christ by the Devil"). The devil is also the mascot of two Brazilian football teams.

> Images of the devil have been a mainstay of Christian art for centuries

You're correct, but you don't see those arts in common churches and houses here. In the place that I live, demons are usually represented by a goat because they don't like the two horned guy at all.

> devil is also the mascot of two Brazilian football teams

That's interesting, maybe it's a newer team. The Brazilian classic mascots are usually either animals or humans.