[neㄘcash, ᨇcash, net⚷eys, or viᖚes?] Name AnonyMint's vapor coin?

[coins101]

Actually, it was never about getting people to invest in Darkcoin. It was about keeping spirits up when the devs were hidden in dark rooms not wanting to communicate with the outside world.

Don't worry, you'll experience that void in communications once you get underway.

[TPTB_need_war]

phenom

Is that a good abstract name for crypto-project?

How would you say it in India, you know, at a train station? Or, how would it be spoken in Japan, China or Brazil?

Appears you are conflating the name of the currency units which will be something popularly spoken and the block chain consensus network name which will only be spoken by developers and business folk. The block chain 2.0 stuff is for serious business intentions.

Intelligent participants in foreign nations have no trouble in adopting and articulating an English word. Serious usage implies more than a rapid exchange of a name in passing in a bus station. Intel or AMD named one of the CPUs Phenom.

[coins101]

phenom

Is that a good abstract name for crypto-project?

How would you say it in India, you know, at a train station? Or, how would it be spoken in Japan, China or Brazil?

Appears you are conflating the name of the currency units which will be something popularly spoken and the block chain consensus network name which will only be spoken by developers and business folk. The block chain 2.0 stuff is for serious business intentions.

Intelligent participants have no trouble in adopting and articulating an English word. Serious usage implies more than a rapid exchange of a name in passing in a bus station.

Oops. Must have missed something. Sorry.

In that case, just use BCCN - block chain consensus network.

[TPTB_need_war]

Don't worry, you'll experience that void in communications once you get underway.

Do you realize you are talking to someone who has hidden himself away for year or more on multiple occasions to code projects, which I also marketed to great adoption.

I hope you realize you are talking to a 50 year old man, not some inexperienced young developer or marketer.

Feedback and discussion is appreciated, but it should also not treat me as if the person had forgotten what I explained about my background.

[coins101]

Don't worry, you'll experience that void in communications once you get underway.

Do you realize you are talking to someone who has hidden himself away for year or more on multiple occasions to code projects.

I hope you realize you are talking to a 50 year old man, not some inexperienced person.

Yes. You're much more eloquent than the average 19 year old super new kid on the block.

But, that's the point. While serious coding work is being done, the troops need stuff to keep them actively engaged in the project. It's the invisible glue a project run on the internet needs to bring people together and keep them together.

[TPTB_need_war]

In that case, just use BCCN - block chain consensus network.

And what is special or memorable about that? It does not even describe any particular special quality of ours.

...I woke up with some ideas (my subconscious thoughts) for alternatives to Sync for the project name:

Maestro
Certiorari  (I bet this was planted into my subconscious from my recent legal research where the Supreme Court issued writ of certiorari)
Writ
Virtuoso
Doyen
Deft
Adept
Adroit

What separates these from 'smart' is the implication of speed, dexterity, and/or harmonious coordination/certification.

Of those I liike Maestro and Deft the most. Maestro is in a similar trademark situation as Sync, and I think it is safe enough to use it. Deft has no trademark issues (only use is redirection to rescue.com for computer repair), there are better domains available such as deft.network (although Mæstro.net/.biz are available). Virtuoso is okay but 8 letters long, somewhat difficult to spell. All of these alternatives to Sync don't combine as well with Ƀits or Bloc, should we prefer to qualify as in ɃitSync or BlocSync. For me, Sync is the most descriptive. Synchronized means everything occurring consistency at the same time, thus massive parallelism and instantaneous. Maestro (and Writ, Certiorari, Virtuoso) means one who harmoniously coordinates, but it implies a more top-down coordination and doesn't imply always consistent, rather just a harmonious flow. In other words Maestro loses the instantaneous or fast meaning. Deft has the fast meaning but doesn't convey the parallel consistently, i.e. synchronization. I really think there is no more precise term than Sync for the block chain network.

I assume the meaning you want to capture with Chain and Link, is that the record of the history is securely interlocked. Some other ideas are Woven, Twill. I think it doesn't add up because we want to say something unique about a block chain that Bitcoin doesn't do. I had thought of Weave for an anonymous coin, but that isn't the primary focus of my work. Besides I don't think we say 'anonymous' when we say 'cash'; rather we assume it is.

Now on to the currency unit names...

Yoonit I really like a lot. Very creative, brandable, and great sound...

[coins101]

...
And what is special or memorable about that? It does not even describe any particular special quality of ours.
....

Its functional. I've worked with plenty of super geeks. They do functional, in most cases. You know, like - BIP, or PoW.

But Yoonit is pretty cool.

Unit. Yoonit. That's pretty functional too.

edit

Gluon 

[THX 1138]

Voted "Maybe it will grow on me over time" (for Bits).

For me it would be broadly yes to Sync as the name for the consensus network, but no to Bits as the main currency name (haven't seen one yet that grabs me for that). Yes to YooBits for the personal currency, or possibly CoolBits.

POSITIVES:

Sync, syᕱᕳ, (but not BlocSync, as sounds like a plumbing issue!) BitSync, Ƀitsync, Chan, Yoobit (the ¥ symbol shared with Yen and Yuan having both positive and negative associations I guess).

POSSIBLES:

Cool, CoolBits (both having continuity with CoolPage), Deft, Writ, Yoonit.

NEGATIVES:

Adept, Adroit, Bits, Bitcash, Ƀitscash, Ƀitscoin, BlocSync, Certiorari, Ching, Cha-Ching, CoolCash, Doyen, Maestro, Virtuoso.

[TPTB_need_war]

I am contemplating the reasons that some voters have chosen "problematic" on the latest version of the poll.

Primarily I think they are concerned about the use of Bits when bits had also been proposed for microBTC (but not widely adopted) and Bitstar uses BITS currency unit. I don't think this is problematic because this is open source community (no corporation has trademarked the names) and no one can own a term except by community resistance to others using a term. Thus bits is becoming more synonymous with crypto-tokens, but no one can rightfully claim ownership to bits yet. Thus which ever crypto-token becomes the most popular with the most widely adopted usage of bits will lay claim to the term. Where this matters is amongst the users, not the investors. So far, the of the vast majority of people in the world who actually know of Bitcoin, they do not associate it with bits. They do understand that a bitcoin is a coin with a bit term prefixed, but most people in this world do not know that a bit is a binary digital quantification of information (two states, 0 or 1). So most people refer to Bitcoin as bitcoins and not as bits, because bits doesn't really mean anything to them other than small pieces of a coin. I think this is yet another reason that Bitcoin is an enigma to the masses (wtf is that 'bit' all about  ) and they they thus tend to not trust Bitcoin, because they don't even understand what the name means (it means nothing except it is a bitcoin what ever that is).

So if we name the store-of-value currency Ƀits (with 2 other more social/playful merge-mined currency units, ✨Cha-ching and Cꙭlcash/bits or ¥ꙭbits/nits), then even if the mass market user only thinks of this as "small pieces of money" then at least they will not primarily refer to it as Bitcoin or Bitstar. They have no choice but to refer to it as bits. Thus if we assume that 1% of the people who have heard of Bitcoin think of it as bits instead of bitcoins, then if our user adoption is more than 1% of Bitcoins, then we win the popular adoption of the term bits. Adjust the percentages as you wish.

Even if Ƀits fails in the community, we have the other two currency units as orthogonal. So the project doesn't die for that.

Thus I don't see Ƀits as problematic, but rather leveraging the familiarity with Bitcoin and trying to make it more focused on Bits. Many people might even assume that Bits is some offshoot of Bitcoin. If it becomes popular, they may even assume it is part of the Bitcoin ecosystem (well it is as an altcoin!). So Bits works very well as an upgrade/offshoot to Bitcoin.

Other reasons that voters might think this is problematic include (and this may not be an exhaustive list):

• 3 currency units and a project name (4 names total)
• my plan to not market to speculators at launch
• Sync has many uses already in the market place
• me as only one developer

The justification for the multiple names has been provided over past 2 page threads. Readers can review.

My plan to launch to users is both for legal reasons to avoid being an illegal unregistered investment security as I think all altcoins to date are, but more importantly because I think the only way to build something serious is to target usership. Whether my plan is workable or not is subject to other deliberation which I don't want to engage publicly at this time.

I already covered the Sync trademark issue upthread.

Yes me as one developer is an intense challenge. But any way, you won't be worried about that because if ever I get something that is ready for your investment consumption, then I won't be the only developer by that juncture.

[f2000]

Ha, I cant believe I never spotted yooɃits...staring right at me. I also didnt pick up on the other parts of your project/coin, so running with that idea

yooSync
yooɃits

...you expand that even further (while running the risk of it sounding bad engrish)

youchat
yooplay (maybe down the line some social games, candy crush style or media aspect)
yoopay

THX 1138 pointed out (which im sure you are already aware of but I embarrassingly didnt realise)

(the ¥ symbol shared with Yen and Yuan having both positive and negative associations I guess).

So if the ¥Ƀ part translates ok, it could make for some nice marketing.

Special mention goes to Deft, maybe not right for this project that that one stood out.



Edit - A few others but not really worth posting

Switch
Liber

Switch  was a debit card in the uk, but got renamed to Maestro (owned by MasterCard)  in 2002. not sure if that would pose a problem.

[TPTB_need_war]

The comments are coming in faster than I can respond, but that is good. I will get to all comments including the very important one from coins101 about the block scaling white paper from the researchers who found the selfish mining weakness in Satoshi's proof-of-work consensus.

NEGATIVES:

...Bits, Bitcash, Ƀitscash, Ƀitscoin, ... Ching, Cha-Ching...

Realize the Bitcash, Ƀitscash, Ƀitscoin are just domains I've registered to catch those who misunderstand or need the association to Bitcoin. They would redirect to the main domain and the site which would not emphasize the Bits suffixes cash or coin. Our new adopters will be branded that one of the currency names is Bits or Ƀits. I explained in my prior post why I think Bits is not a negative. I am interested to hear your thoughts or rebuttal to my logic on Bits.

Why is Cha-Ching a negative for a third currency unit? It doesn't cost us anything to have 3 currency units instead of only 1 or 2. Cha-ching is the sound of a cash register. It is synonymous with exchanging cash or earning money. I think it comes more from my generation (when the cash registers actually made that sound), but even my 25 year old filipina asian gf (in Philippines never been abroad) had heard the term, but she wasn't quite sure what it meant. She hears it in a social context, "yeah like cha-CHINNNNGGGGG" is what said to me. I asked her what it meant and she didn't know. But it has catchy recall powers.

On the internet there are no country barriers, rather cultural and perhaps language. But money even tends to transcend language barriers, because people need to exchange value with those in other cultures.

I rather see money stratifying on type of use cases, e.g. for your $millions in stored value, you don't want that in a currency that is debased 10% per annum (unless the growth of adoption of the currency is outpacing the debasement, but then you are making a speculative investment, and not parking in a store-of-value). These use cases also dictate a demeanor which implies the sort of name which will would appeal to the use case demographic.

_____________
Ƀits	store-of-value and large asset transactions
Cꙭl/¥ꙭbits	virtual goods and services (esp social networking context)
✨(Cha-)Ching	rapid-fire, unconscious micro-transactions

Thus maybe what I should do is have 3 merged-mined currencies with 3 different levels of debasement and money supply, so the market can express itself both in terms of naming preferences and also the complex interaction of different currencies with different rates of inflation and velocities of money. When you mine a winning block, you received some of each currency.

Debasement	Money Supply	Name & Currency Unit
~0%	1 billion	Ƀits
~5%	1 trillion	Cꙭlbits
~10%	1 quadrillion	✨Cha-ching (or we chan if we prefer)

The advantage to users of micro-transactions of a higher debasement rate, is that money will have a much higher velocity of money, because no one has a great incentive to hold it a long time (except as a speculative investment). Thus they will have a better opportunity to attain some. The problem Bitcoin and all crytocurrency has is the investors HODL. That is retarding its adoption! It is very difficult to get investors to understand this (Inflatacoin wasn't successful), so the clever way I have devised is to have merge-mined currencies with different debasement rates. Let the HODLers go more into Ƀits[1], but watch them get jealous when speculators[1] made more gains in ✨Cha-ching due to faster adoption. So then a market arbitrage takes place and the market will figure out the balance. This is sort of like a bimetallic money standard effect.

[1] Disclaimer: I am not promoting any expectation of profits. Investors and speculators will likely lose money at the start. Adoption must precede long-term investment gains.

[coins101]

...including the very important one from coins101 about the block scaling white paper from the researchers who found the selfish mining weakness in Satoshi's proof-of-work consensus....

I look forward to a super dump, err - sorry, donation, to post my ClickzYoonitɃitsCꙭl/¥ꙭbits✨(Cha-)ChingGluon address.

(I think I officially moved in to trolling territory)

[TPTB_need_war]

I haven't seen a better suggestion than Sync for a block chain 2.0 network. We can use either Sync or BitSync.

I am willing to give up Bits and retain Yoobit or Coolbit (and the plural forms). This seems to simplify and Yoobits are more descriptive than bits. Coolbit is less brandable and seems to imply limitation or non-inclusivity, "tell me about only the cool bits". Note however I did register the domain bits.cool which is nice looking succinct domain. Also I don't see any reason to prefer Yoonit over Yoobit, because users don't think of money as a unit. The Yoo is more meaningful as alternative spelling of You. People may mispell Youbit, so we will need domains for both spellings.

But I also think we need two currency units, because we need to give the market the choice of debasement they prefer. So what to name the other currency unit? No one has expressed support for cha-ching. Why? Does the community like Chan (ch'an)?

[THX 1138]

I am interested to hear your thoughts or rebuttal to my logic on Bits.

I'm not arguing with it on a logical basis. I can see that, amongst other points, as you say, it "works very well as an upgrade/offshoot to Bitcoin". It has utility, but to me seems lacking a commercial hook.

...Why is Cha-Ching a negative for a third currency unit? It doesn't cost us anything to have 3 currency units instead of only 1 or 2. Cha-ching is the sound of a cash register. It is synonymous with exchanging cash or earning money. I think it comes more from my generation (when the cash registers actually made that sound), but even my 25 year old filipina asian gf (in Philippines never been abroad) had heard the term, but she wasn't quite sure what it meant. She hears it in a social context, "yeah like cha-CHINNNNGGGGG" is what said to me. I asked her what it meant and she didn't know. But it has catchy recall powers...

True, it's catchy and I can't argue with the sound of the cash register, but to me it didn't leap out and have instant appeal - a personal thing, and I understand I might well be out-voted. If nothing else emerges soon then, yes, as a third currency unit, but I prefer Chan or ch'an. Unless time is pressing to come up with this third one, I just feel that something better could bubble up soon?

By comparison, the second I saw Sync and Yoobits, they immediately grabbed me - so too with BitSync.

I too would also place Yoobits over Coolbits.

...So if the ¥Ƀ part translates ok, it could make could make for some nice marketing....

That I like.

...Switch  was a debit card in the uk, but got renamed to Maestro (owned by MasterCard)...

Yes, I recall those.

[TPTB_need_war]

I don't like YooSync, because the block chain synchronization is not autonomous.

I think I prefer Sync or BitSync, but one other idea is Syncyo

Now that is brandable.

So then Coinmarketcap will likely refer to our currency unit marketcaps as:

Syncyo Yoobit or just Yoobit
Syncyo Ch'an or just Ch'an

Or:

Syncyo (Yoobit and Ch'an combined)

Feedback please?

[TPTB_need_war]

I am interested to hear your thoughts or rebuttal to my logic on Bits.

I'm not arguing with it on a logical basis. I can see that, amongst other points, as you say, it "works very well as an upgrade/offshoot to Bitcoin". It has utility, but to me seems lacking a commercial hook.

Bits is non descriptive. It could be bits of anything. We would be forcing people to use a term which is not natural because it doesn't identify what it is.

Yoobits are bits you control. It doesn't say what these bits are that you control, but only that you control them. That is more descriptive than bits but still abstract enough to become money. Money is something we in theory (or desire to) personally control. So Yoobits are a private property. But abstract private property is precisely what money is. Private property that is not abstract, is thus not fungible and can only be traded efficiently using the medium of abstract private property known as money.

So Yoobits captures the essence of what money is which is abstract private property. As Andreas Antonopoulos recently explained, money is a medium of communication.

...Yoobits are more descriptive than bits.

Where this matters is amongst the users, not the investors. So far, the of the vast majority of people in the world who actually know of Bitcoin, they do not associate it with bits. They do understand that a bitcoin is a coin with a bit term prefixed, but most people in this world do not know that a bit is a binary digital quantification of information (two states, 0 or 1). So most people refer to Bitcoin as bitcoins and not as bits, because bits doesn't really mean anything to them other than small pieces of a coinsomething. I think this is yet another reason that Bitcoin is an enigma to the masses (wtf is that 'bit' all about  ) and they they thus tend to not trust Bitcoin, because they don't even understand what the name means (it means nothing except it is a bitcoin what ever that is).

So if we name the store-of-value currency Ƀits (with 2 other more social/playful merge-mined currency units, ✨Cha-ching and Cꙭlcash/bits or ¥ꙭbits/nits), then even if the mass market user only thinks of this as "small pieces of money" then at least they will not primarily refer to it as Bitcoin or Bitstar. They have no choice but to refer to it as bits.

[THX 1138]

I don't like YooSync, because the block chain synchronization is not autonomous.

Fair enough.

...I think I prefer Sync or BitSync, but one other idea is Syncyo...

My very first reaction on saying it was that it took a couple of goes; getting a little tongue-tied in the middle: Syn...c...yo.

For me, the stand-out one is BitSync.

With that I'll be off to bed.

[TPTB_need_war]

An advantage of Yoonits is then won't have dozens of copycoins, selfbits, mebits (which was one of my early naming suggestions), mybits, ourbits, bitsme, bitsyou, imeminebits, mymyselfbits, facebits, yobits, ubits, uberbits, someofabitches, lol.

Disadvantages are lose the connection to Bitcoin, Younits can be pronounced "Yo", units and nits are less meaningful to normal people than bits.

I suppose this was the reason I preferred Bits so we could capture all the copy coins with the general concept of Bits. Bits is less descriptive and this is a plus and a minus.

Same criticism can be leveled against any portmanteau such as BitSync, so the copies can be DocuSync, ChainSync, Synchain, etc.. That is why I say Syncyo is more brandable (defensible in the market).

Maybe we should entirely get away from the concept of bits? Yoonits is more brandable (defensible) than yoobits.

[trollercoaster]

I really like ¥ꙭɃits for the fun money/token, I think it's something the azns can relate to with the ¥.

And it sounds like "You" which fits in with the social media theme.

I think the merged mining idea is also brilliant with different tokens marketed towards various uses.

[THX 1138]

Just before I go...

...Bits is non descriptive. It could be bits of anything. We would be forcing people to use a term which is not natural because it doesn't identify what it is...

This might account for my earlier instinctive reservation over the term by itself, which non-techies and those unfamiliar with Bitcoin wouldn't easily identify with.

I really like ¥ꙭɃits for the fun money/token, I think it's something the azns can relate to with the ¥.

And it sounds like "You" which fits in with the social media theme.

I agree. And I like the look of ¥ooBits; some graphical potential there.