Actually, on reflection, I do have a comment after all -
Since, as advised, the original logo might have been seen as tongue-in-cheek, or an homage to previous images, but it was close to the line when it first came out, and has only looked more incongruous and inappropriate as time has passed.
To continue that design, and 'expand' it, seems rather to miss the point of diversity altogether.
Personally, I thought the black man icon was the gay representation, until I saw the image with the flowing locks and rainbow design.
If I were a gay person, or a person of colour, I would take exception to this level of trite standardisation and caricature that is the very essence of what diversity is actually fighting against.
And, as advised, if I was disabled, I would be miffed at not being represented at all!