There will always be a cheaper shitcoin, even if we will go down to sats. We should not lower standards for someone who will sooner or later get rid of the money on the unsuccessful investments.
Sure. But is choosing a lower denomination really "lowering the standards"? I'm pretty sure pricing gold in grams instead of whole bars isn't really a bad thing.
Also, unit bias is just one thing. Another advantage would be that it's more natural to vocally say "1000 bits" or "100k sats" than saying "zero point zero zero one(0.001) bitcoin".
I say 1% of bitcoin or half of percent of bitcoin etc. I think that if we will start to use other names like micro bitcoins, mili bitcoins etc. newbies will start to thing that there are different types of bicoin, they will then go to bitcoin cash, bitcoin gold etc.
Do you remember
famous Roger Ver interview when he was screening "its bitcoin cash not be-cash, stop insulting me" to the interviewer just before rage quit? He did this because he build whole marketing around bitcoin cash in a way to be as close to BTC as possible. To not be thread like another altcoin. That's why it was so important for him to force people to use Bitcoin in his altcoin name.
That's why i think that true bitcoin should be named bitcoin by everyone who use it. If everyone will start to use, sats, bits than newbie will come around searching for bitcoin, he will find bitcoin cash first. Maybe that's the true motivation of this.
Poll
