Looking mostly at it with "tall and graceful" in mind I'd say Ed's tattoo is closer to the bad than the good. Like Jeff, I note the right uppermost leg-end of the "good" logo curves back to the left leaving a little curvy crook in the "whitespace" to its right. That "whitespace" on the tat is has a completely straight edge against the right side of the W.

But then, on the plus side: the tat W's serifs are heavy and blocky. And, while the tat W doesn't appear to be as tall and graceful as the "good" logo, it does extend a lot higher in the containing circle than the "bad" W.

Do we know how big the tattoo is? I'd bet that the smaller a tat is the more the tattoo "artist" is forced to simplify design. Little itsy details would tend to bleed (excuse the expression ...ouch!) into one another and just get splodgy.

My final word - vote - would be that we give Ed some kudos for his WP enthusiasm.

Sorry about the wordiness, but typography and logos get me all hot and bothered.