I like #2. What about making the arrow go clockwise?
2b and 2c are my favorites. In any case, though, the gradient on the green letters looks best in the second example. In 2a and 2c, the tail of the g looks like it’s fading into the dark background.
Without looking at any other replies: either of the ones in the second image.
Reading further: in the second batch, the ones with the plain ‘o’ make me think “gooey”. I like the one with the arrow inside the o.
Agree completely. First one looks like a hack job. 2c is probably my favorite of the bunch, but I agree that the arrow should have a little more weight to it–it doesn’t balance well with the strokes of the letters.
I like 2b.
Comments on others: 2a–the “o-as-arrow” cuts off the flow of the italic typeface. Italics are good for this, since they are often used in logos to signify movement or speed. Also, the weight of the O appears much lighter (skinnier) than the other letters. In typography, letters such as O and S usually extend a little above and below the x height of the face (typically defined by the height of a lower-case letter x). Your O seems to be even lower.
2c–See above comments about x-height and face. Might work better if you skewed the O in “go” to match the angle and height of the e (for example).
Don’t be too quick to discard any of your ideas (except maybe the first). Sometimes a great idea is right there under an ok idea with a so-so execution. You just have to manipulate it a bit until it’s just right.
I still like 2b. The simplest. Gets me with color and informality (lower case letters) alone. Don’t need any other clever stuff.
I do like #1, but I imagine the shiny, web 2.0 style branding is going to start looking old and tired within a year or two.
I like #2 on black, but for some reason I think it looks cheap on white, like it’s from a Geocities page.