tl;dr version: concept is nice, execution is not
I really like the idea of rainbow contours, but I think it could be simplified quite a bit. There are too many colors (11 total), and the contours are too complicated and too close together. To me, it fails the embroidery, small-size, and one-color tests for good design. (But hey, if the usage is just for digital, full-color, and larger formats, then failing these tests isn't an issue).
I would have minimized the amount of contours (and therefore total colors), which would also increase the space between the contours. I also would have smoothed out the contours a little bit. Logos are supposed to represent a concept in a simple manner, and I feel like these contours are too literal when they don't need to be.
And then there's the wordmark, which is just not good. It's an odd choice of typeface (1920's German), the spacing and kerning don't feel right to me, the sandwich of font weights seems weird, and there's the manually-modified "J" of "JWOC" that results in an awkward junction of the straight and curved sections. Also weird: that the left ascender of the W is closer to the J than it is to the middle ascender of the W.
Yeah, so I would have simplified the rainbow contours, paired it with a more contemporary typeface, and kerned it better.
I don't have all of the JWOC logos seared into my memory, but one question I asked myself when writing the last comment was, "Can you remember a good one?"
And this one
came immediately to mind. Perhaps there have been better ones since then, but it's memorable and decently executed.
2012 - what is that, some sort of bird?
The 2019 lettering is odd. I like the contours. It looks good on the O' tops I saw.