The unit poll

[Biodom]

Interesting.  As of the current vote,

There are only 18 votes for using the name "Bit" for 0.000001 BTC
There are 33 votes for any option other than "Bits" (such as Microbitcoin, Microbit, Mike, or Micro).

And yet people for some reason claim that there is a consensus for the word "Bit" to describe 0.000001 BTC, or that the matter is settled.

Because there's a handful of people that formed a cult around bits much like dogecoin. It has become a meme almost. They even have fancy drawings now....

That shit really has to stop

they infested the reddit and changetip each other-LOL
To those proponents: Nobody gives a hoot about bit(s)-understand it and go away with this nonsense, pretty please

[1715372332]

1715372332

[1715372332]

1715372332

[franky1]

There are 33 votes for any option other than "Bits" (such as Microbitcoin, Microbit, Mike, or Micro).

there is no single option saying:

'any option other than Bits' that has 33 votes..

stop trying to manipulate votes.

this is like saying this:

candidate 1: 10 votes
candidate 2: 8 votes
candidate 3: 2 votes

normal people will say candidate 1 wins due to most votes.. but you will twist it to say an equal number of people disagree that candidate 1 should win simply by combining other votes.

leave the votes as they are..

[DannyHamilton]

There are 33 votes for any option other than "Bits" (such as Microbitcoin, Microbit, Mike, or Micro).

there is no single option saying:

'any option other than Bits' that has 33 votes..

stop trying to manipulate votes.

this is like saying this:

candidate 1: 10 votes
candidate 2: 8 votes
candidate 3: 2 votes

normal people will say candidate 1 wins due to most votes.. but you will twist it to say an equal number of people disagree that candidate 1 should win simply by combining other votes.

leave the votes as they are..

No, it's more like saying:

Candidate 1: 18 votes
Candidate 2: 16 votes
Candidate 3: 17 votes

Normal people will say nobody wins, due to no majority.  But you twist it to say candidate 1 should win because of more votes than either of the other 2 candidates.

Meanwhile, if you held the same poll with ONLY Candidate 1 and ONE of the other two candidates, you might find that most of the people who originally voted for the eliminated candidate would not vote for candidate 1, and instead would place their vote for the remaining candidate.  In that case, the MAJORITY don't want candidate 1.

This is one of many reasons why this poll is not useful.

There were a total of 68 voters.  38 of them (55.8%) chose NOT to vote for "bits" as a replacement word for MicroBitcoin.  Clearly, the majority do not accept that new usage that the vocal minority are trying to ram through.

[Cubic Earth]

I didn't vote, but I am think we should adopt the 'stock split' model.  Every 1 Bitcoin would then equal 1000 bitcoins.  The total number of Satoshis would remain unchanged.

[franky1]

No, it's more like saying:

Candidate 1: 18 votes
Candidate 2: 16 votes
Candidate 3: 17 votes

Normal people will say nobody wins, due to no majority.  But you twist it to say candidate 1 should win because of more votes than either of the other 2 candidates.

Meanwhile, if you held the same poll with ONLY Candidate 1 and ONE of the other two candidates, you might find that most of the people who originally voted for the eliminated candidate would not vote for candidate 1, and instead would place their vote for the remaining candidate.  In that case, the MAJORITY don't want candidate 1.

This is one of many reasons why this poll is not useful.

There were a total of 68 voters.  38 of them (55.8%) chose NOT to vote for "bits" as a replacement word for MicroBitcoin.  Clearly, the majority do not accept that new usage that the vocal minority are trying to ram through.

i do not see an option that says

'not bits' : 38

you adding up multiple votes to twist results.

so now lets ignore your 18 17 16

and lets use:
Candidate 1 - 18
Candidate 2 - 12
Candidate 3 - 30
Candidate 4 - 6
Candidate 5 - 4

it is clearly obvious that candidate 3 has the most votes. yet you will add up candidates 1,2,4,5 to say 'no'.

you CANT add up other numbers just to twist the votes in your favour. as thats the kind of crappy move the UK government did, by adding the votes of candidates 4, 5 and 2. giving those votes to candidate 1 and made candidate 1 the leader (1 being a decision to form a coalition).

so lets remove the curtain:
Microbitcoin (0.000001), 100 b.u.    - 18
Microbit (0.000001), 100 b.u.    - 12
Bit (0.000001), 100 b.u.    - 30
Mike (0.000001), 100 b.u.    - 6
Micro (0.000001), 100 b.u.    - 4

using your logic i can say that
52 voters hate microbitcoin and only 18 love it
58 voters hate microbit and only 12 love it
40 voters hate Bit and only 30 love it
64 voters hate Mike and only 6 love it
66 voters hate Micro and only 4 love it

making Bit the least hated option, aswell as the most voted for lovers of Bit

[dree12]

There are 33 votes for any option other than "Bits" (such as Microbitcoin, Microbit, Mike, or Micro).

there is no single option saying:

'any option other than Bits' that has 33 votes..

stop trying to manipulate votes.

this is like saying this:

candidate 1: 10 votes
candidate 2: 8 votes
candidate 3: 2 votes

normal people will say candidate 1 wins due to most votes.. but you will twist it to say an equal number of people disagree that candidate 1 should win simply by combining other votes.

leave the votes as they are..

No, it's more like saying:

Candidate 1: 18 votes
Candidate 2: 16 votes
Candidate 3: 17 votes

Normal people will say nobody wins, due to no majority.  But you twist it to say candidate 1 should win because of more votes than either of the other 2 candidates.

Meanwhile, if you held the same poll with ONLY Candidate 1 and ONE of the other two candidates, you might find that most of the people who originally voted for the eliminated candidate would not vote for candidate 1, and instead would place their vote for the remaining candidate.  In that case, the MAJORITY don't want candidate 1.

This is one of many reasons why this poll is not useful.

There were a total of 68 voters.  38 of them (55.8%) chose NOT to vote for "bits" as a replacement word for MicroBitcoin.  Clearly, the majority do not accept that new usage that the vocal minority are trying to ram through.

I just want to note that the poll is approval voting, not first-past-the-post. So the poll's results do not change if an option is eliminated.

A consequence is that options should be compared with the total votes instead of with other bins, so the number of votes for other options is irrelevant to how well a particular option is approved.

[DannyHamilton]

I just want to note that the poll is approval voting, not first-past-the-post. So the poll's results do not change if an option is eliminated.

A consequence is that options should be compared with the total votes instead of with other bins, so the number of votes for other options is irrelevant to how well a particular option is approved.

Which only goes to prove my point further.

Only 30 out of (now) 69 voters "approve" of "bits".  That means that a majority, 39 out of 69 (56.5%), do not "approve" of bits.

As I said originally:

And yet people for some reason claim that there is a consensus for the word "Bit" to describe 0.000001 BTC, or that the matter is settled.

[giszmo]

Interesting. Given that only 75% of the Bitcoin forum users approve of Bitcoin, I have a doubt if people understand this voting mode. Personally I believe this is the first vote that actually makes sense as I never felt like making a choice between Satoshi, mɃ and Ƀ as it depends on whether I want to buy a second of telephony, a pizza or a car and having a pick of any single one of those gave those Bit-evangelists or Mike-evangelists a far too high representation.

Edit: Percentage was wrong. Also I now saw how people again try to determine the "winner". Why? Only trolls or what?

[BawsyBoss]

Oh, darn. I voted for the wrong one because I was too lazy to actually count.

[dree12]

Interesting. Given that only 75% of the Bitcoin forum users approve of Bitcoin, I have a doubt if people understand this voting mode. Personally I believe this is the first vote that actually makes sense as I never felt like making a choice between Satoshi, mɃ and Ƀ as it depends on whether I want to buy a second of telephony, a pizza or a car and having a pick of any single one of those gave those Bit-evangelists or Mike-evangelists a far too high representation.

Edit: Percentage was wrong. Also I now saw how people again try to determine the "winner". Why? Only trolls or what?

I feel the Bitcoin approval rating makes sense given how annoyed many on this forum are when people suggest maintaining the status quo. There are many here who would prefer any smaller unit over Bitcoin because of the great value of the latter.

I'll leave this poll open until we ideally have 100 votes. It's not far now.

[Bitcoin Casino Directory]

It doesn't let me vote but I vote for Bitcoin,Bits and Satoshis

Screw mBTC, go all the way down to uBitcoin (Bits)

[dree12]

Since the last few votes are always the hardest, I'm going to close the poll now. Conclusions:

• No consensus on any specific new proposal.
• Most people are fine with sticking to Bitcoin as-is.
• The satoshi has majority support.
• Tonal units are not wanted.
• Nanobitcoins are surprisingly quite popular given the inability to send just 1 nanobitcoin (probably for the same reason many games score 10 or 100 points at a time).

A further conclusion is the most popular name for each base unit. In satoshis:

Base units	Most popular name
100000000	Bitcoin
100000	Millibitcoin
100	Bit
1	Satoshi

(only units with 2 or more alternative included)