Logo is fine, all information is still correct, token should NOT be removed
As the requester feels he is losing ground on the migrated token argument, he is suddenly switching the narrative of his arguments. Now suddenly the token symbol looks pixelated, which is obviously a baseless claim. The logo looks perfectly fine, and does not appear pixelated at all.
Continuing with the previous discussion, it's necessary to keep this token in the TCR, since it is even still being traded on Uniswap as we speak, so why should we remove this token from the TCR? That would just be dumb. On top of that, there are numerous possible use cases for keeping this unique Ethereum token in the token curated list. Keeping the initial Aragon token in the TCR is necessary for not narrowing down the use cases of the TCR to only 1 use case. This token should remain in the TCR, because it holds a lot of valuable information. By removing this token from the TCR, a precedent will be set to remove all token swapped, (seemingly) dead projects, etc. This is nowhere stated in the TCR, and we should not want to do this. That would only remove value from the TCR.
Furthermore, there is no ground for the removal of this Ethereum token, which is an unique token on the Ethereum blockchain. The migrated token that the requester is referring to, has another name, another logo AND another token contract address, so they are far from duplicates.
As this token holds a lot of information, we SHOULD NOT remove it from the TCR. On top of that, no policy rule exists saying that this submission should be removed. There is ALSO NO precedent. Instead, the policy leans more towards NOT DENYING tokens based on token swaps. And last, but not neast, there is enough differentiation between the two tokens (name AND logo). Because of all of the above, jurors in this case should vote NO, to keep this token in the TCR.