Then open your eyes, you will see much more.....

Rune    17 (25.4%)
Secore    3 (4.5%)
Vortex    2 (3%)
Boolberry    41 (61.2%)
BitRing    2 (3%)
Boollion    2 (3%)
Total Voters: 67

Just to muddy the waters a little more....

I crashed out last night mulling over the name Breeze.

Delivered on the Breeze

Feel the Breeze

It's a Breeze

Like a Breeze

It has many positive connotations, is light and friendly, is good graphically, the BBR ticker sort of works and, best of all, it isn't Rune.

It still leaves the gaping hole of uniqueness that Boolberry fills so well, but like I said, it's not Rune.

It's prolly a crap idea, but I'm putting it out there in the hope of taking some floating voters away from Rune.

I'm still voting no change.

If Apple changed their name to Fanboy Erotic Aids do you not think there would be a dump of shares?

I know, it's a real bitch when you try to spread Raspberry Pi on your toast, catches me out all the time. 

1) But without refunds voters are forced to put their money where their mouth is. No refunds will likely weed out mischievous votes.

2) The count is not done until the end of voting then tactical bidding cannot occur.

Well, I won't waste your time answering your questions then...... 

Yes, but I do think that if we are going to do a vote we prolly ought to make the most out of it and consider all options - someone may come up with something truly genius.

Actually, that's not awful.

Has a lot of the same qualities of boolberry - which I still prefer. Does it work in far off foreign tongues?

I fell asleep last night mulling over the name Breeze.

It's a breeze

Feel the breeze

I know, it's prolly shit.

At the end of the day I think changing the name for anything less than spectacular just puts the coin at more risk.

Yes there are, so why are we changing it?

It would be a shame to throw a potential jewel of a name out on a whim, it does deserve debate.

Probably not, but autocracy should be kept in check, much like shareholders should do with their CEO.

The essential problem here is that 60% of the community were denied their voice. The moment the change was announced it was met with unhappy responses which were derided with that tired, old and almost always wrongful accusation of shilling.

The first vote should have been whether to hand complete control of the branding to windjc in the first place. If the vote gave him that control he could then continue as he sees fit without a murmur from me or many others. Other coins have laid all this kind of stuff out in papers designed to fend off trouble further up the road. Maybe BBR should do this? The more successful the coin the more disagreement there is going to be.

I am not a shill, I rarely get this vocal about things, but I happen to think that CZ stumbled on a very, very good name those few months ago - it has many, many positives and few, if any, negatives. I believe that people will grow to like the name and it could become synonymous with an ethic and product - big corporations dream of achieving that and we could have it here by happy accident.

I would abide by any vote, even one that meant I would lose influence, as long as it was a fair and open vote - I would have no choice.

On the other hand, whilst a very significant section of the community is excluded, I have every reason to complain.

Lol, everyone is so suspicious.......

This^^

We should max out the opportunity to increase zoidberg's fund.

Where you been zoidberg?  

I like this idea also, how would the names for the poll be chosen?

I also think the result should be set in stone for some period of time, perhaps two or three years, we don't need this kind of distraction on a regular basis.

Lol 

Is this finished?

What does it mean?

Hahaha, shill for monero - you are such a fool.

I doubt you could work your way out of a paper bag.

How does windjc feel supported if the vote is rigged and he has seen the 60% result on the other poll? How could he not know that the result was false?

On the other hand, if he had majority support by continuing with boolberry why would he feel unsupported?

Your argument is senseless.

The way forward is a fair vote, I would abide by any result, I would have no choice.

I find it hard to believe that a seasoned marketing guy would come up with any of the offerings in the official poll, but especially Rune. It is so generic, so cliched, so baggage-laden and so vapid as to be beyond appalling. I don't like it.

Anyway, that sums it up, sort of, perhaps we should leave each other (and this thread) in peace and let the grown ups talk  

Should we defer to a 60% majority who are against the change?

One man or 60% of the community - which matters?

Then lets vote by donation, your a rich man, you could top any bid we could muster. Is there a problem with that?

I'm not sure being a large investor entitles you to attempt to censor other investors though, what do you think?



I'm sussex, I'm the one you think has a problem.

Taking an argument to the point of absurdity is not what I would expect from you James.

This isn't just some little change, it is a big change with consequences.

I'll ask you again, why do companies spend millions on branding if it doesn't matter?