the medals should be standardized on the front facia; and then unique to the year/locale on the rear...don't you think...?

@Cooper, before you make such an opinionated judgment about the medals, perhaps you should understand that there was actually a reason why the medals looked as they did during these Olympics. They were created from recycled electronic parts, and this clip illustrates well the reason for their design:

Obviously, the link didn't post. Let's try again:
http://www.motherboard.tv/2010/2/3/medal-gear-turning-electronics-into-olympic-gold--2

@Suzanne: Opinionated judgment? Sorry if my opinion - to which I'm entitled - seems to offend you. But, I don't care. Just because they're made of recycled computer parts - which I think is totally cool - doesn't mean they can't look like medals instead of snacks. It doesn't matter where the metal came from - melted computer parts, old headlights, teeth, whatever - it could be formed (forged, cast, stamped, rolled, etc.) into something that reflects the significance of the award. Thanks for the interesting link. Like I said, I think the recycling angle is great. I just think the shape of the medals themselves leaves a lot to be desired.

Cooper, did you even watch the video? The designers referenced the topography of the Vancouver area when shaping the medal. I would think that the Winter Olympic athletes would appreciate that attention to detail, but obviously you are not an Olympic athlete, so the meaning is lost on you. And yes, of course you are entitled to your opinion, but I tire of reading such comments as yours that compare the design to "rapper bling," when there was obviously a lot more thought put into it! That is where the "judgment" part of my comment came in!

@Suzanne: Because I don't appreciate a bizarre attempt to make a medal look vaguely like a 3D topo map it's obvious that I'm not an Olympic athlete? Wow. A leap like that certainly makes YOU a candidate for some kind of Olympics . . .

@Cooper,

Cooper, your reading comprehension leaves much to be desired. There was nothing causal about my statement...I didn't write that BECAUSE you didn't agree with the design, you must not be an Olympic athlete. My point was, that the unique aesthetics of the medal, which were born out of respect for nature and the beautiful land of Vancouver, would likely be appreciated by the Olympic athletes (which you are not). In the end, your opinion really doesn't matter...it isn't like you have one hanging in your closet to glare at, and I'm sure that the Olympians who medaled are quite proud of theirs! As many have mentioned on this thread, it is what the medals represent (and not their size, shape or color) that make them priceless.

@Suzanne: Actually, here's what you wrote: " I would think that the Winter Olympic athletes would appreciate that attention to detail, but obviously you are not an Olympic athlete, so the meaning is lost on you."

The causal relationship is pretty clear whether you intended it to be or not: I'm "obviously" not an Olympic athlete, SO the meaning [of the medals' shape] is lost on me.

Not sure quite what I've said so far that makes my Olympic team status so obvious to you, but whatever. I don't see how that affects my appreciation for art or even for the geographic area where the games happened to be held. I loved Vancouver even before anyone dreamed they'd be hosting the Olympics this year. The shape of this year's Olympic medals neither increases my appreciation of Vancouver nor reminds me of Vancouver's abounding natural beauty.

You've made the rather rash assumption that I'm not an Olympic athlete twice now - but, since you know nothing about me, you're just guessing. Let me put your mind at ease. I agree that it wouldn't matter if Olympic medals were made of plastic and looked like broccoli spears - they are priceless to the winners. I know this not because I have an Olympic medal but because I have the hockey puck that I shot into the net during the game of my hockey career - and I wouldn't trade it for two Olympic golds.

I stand by my original point (which Suzanne didn't like so she tried to turn this into a subtle personal attack): I think both the 2010 and 2006 Winter Games medals were somewhat unattractive and I wish the IOC would come up with a more dignified design which would remain relatively unchanged from year to year.

@ Cooper

Your MO on this thread is hysterical. You are accusing me of personal attacks, when all that I originally did was provide a link providing information about why the medals might be interpreted as something other than "rapper bling."

You then made a rather bizarre inference about me connecting you to an Olympic athlete through my comment, which is ridiculous. The word "but," is not synonymous with "because," by the way. Reread the post and rethink how you addressed it.

Now you are ranting about your own achievements in hockey, maintaining that you would prefer your hockey puck to any medal. You obviously have missed my entire point. Criticizing the "ugly medals" would be like me criticizing your hockey puck. I would never do it. It means something to you, just as these medals mean something to the athletes that earned them. I simply do not understand your virtriolic approach to this thread. Did you not make the cut with the hockey team or something? You are taking this waaaayyyyy too seriously.