If you haven't heard of boost, I can only assume you're not a C++ programmer. Boost is a lot of what makes C++ programming bearable. The sooner its libraries become part of Standard C++, the better. (Hell, it would be a start if Linux and Mac OS even shipped with them. Debian has a libboost-dev package, but the presence of boost ought to be guaranteed on every machine that has g++(1) present.)
Anyway: the logo contest. Check out the entries. If you look at them, some of them are awesome. Others are excellent. Still others are adequate, but the kind of thing anyone could have done. The rest are laughably bad. So bad you wonder what possessed anyone to submit them. I can only assume they were the result of some kind of dare along the lines of "make a Google image search for your name come up with a hideous abomination that you'd be embarrassed of even if it was your two year old kid's first drawing on a computer".
I won't give any examples of which entries I think belong in the categories I just made up, though I will say that I think there are about ten entries I'd rank above the winner (one of which is the disqualified winner), which I think only belongs in the "adequate" category.
I'm not sure which I find more odd: that there were some terrible entries, or that there were any really good ones. Google suggests that many of the best entries (as judged by me) were created by people who are actually programmers. So now I'm wondering if I suck at graphic design compared to other C++ programmers, whether boost holds some particular attraction for people with graphic design skills, whether inkscape can turn any C++ programmer into a graphic designer, or whether I'm just sufficiently like other boost users that I think their designs are much better than Joe Sixpack would judge them.
Thinking about it, I can't really see Joe liking any of the entries: not one involves a nation's flag, sports apparatus, bikini-clad women with "enhanced" breasts, devices with internal combustion engines, or offensive language.