[POLL] End the 'bit' controversy: What to (nick)name 100 Satoshi / 1 µXBT

[jbreher]

Also, why is this poll valid, and the one i posted is not?

I don't know about the other poll - I didn't follow the link. But your poll excludes known preferred choices, and includes superfluous inline editorial commentary. I have no training in scientific polling, but I am pretty sure that both of these are no-nos.

Plus, no option for 'pie'. Mmmmm... pie.

[Kluge]

100 satoshis (or 100 satosh).

Thanks.

[jbreher]

the consensus has decided on bit, with a over 70% vote..

As has been pointed out before, you don't seem to know what the word 'consensus' means. You don't have the consensus of the community. All you can claim is a majority of the minority that bothered to vote.

there is no point spending months debating names and never using them.

Maybe this is part of the problem. At this point in time, whatever we end up calling a unit for 100 satoshis is irrelevant - it is such a tiny amount that it has no real-world applicability. When the unit gets useful, a consensus will emerge - affected folk will finally take an interest in the topic.

[Jaaawsh]

I think xi would be the best, all the others are too similar.

[zimmah]

I know my list doesn't have many options but those are the names i have seen around, if you have any suggestions feel free to place them.

[yayayo]

Who needs a (nick)name for 100 Satoshi?

100 Satoshi are simply 100 Satoshi. Bitcoin for the full unit and Satoshi for the smallest fraction are the only names we need. These are established by natural use.

Besides that OP's options are total crap.

ya.ya.yo!

[lynn_402]

Who needs a (nick)name for 100 Satoshi?

100 Satoshi are simply 100 Satoshi. Bitcoin for the full unit and Satoshi for the smallest fraction are the only names we need. These are established by natural use.

Besides that OP's options are total crap.

ya.ya.yo!

If people want a nickname for it, saying 100 sats seems quite logical.

[zimmah]

I like a 'finney', to honor Hal Finney.

It's related to the early days of bitcoin development.
And it sounds good.

added

[singularity]

Why don't you add "bit" like multiple people have asked?

The only reason you would not is that you know it would win the vote. Prove me wrong.

[zimmah]

Why don't you add "bit" like multiple people have asked?

The only reason you would not is that you know it would win the vote. Prove me wrong.

because having bit would not end the controversy and the confusion.

however we could create a poll where we can vote between 'bit' and whatever the winner of this poll is.

[phillipsjk]

Who needs a (nick)name for 100 Satoshi?

The nick name is needed because Bitpay is standardizing on that unit for accounting purposes.

[singularity]

Except for there is no confusion. You are just saying there is confusion because YOU don't like bit.

Put "bit" into the vote or it's less than worthless.

[phillipsjk]

Why don't you add "bit" like multiple people have asked?

The only reason you would not is that you know it would win the vote. Prove me wrong.

I think singularity has a point here. If "bit" is as obviously bad as we say it is, the "bit" option should garner fewer votes than the "anything but 'bit'"  option.

[bryant.coleman]

I like a 'finney', to honor Hal Finney.

It's related to the early days of bitcoin development.
And it sounds good.

Finney sounds much better than all the options given here (I had voted for xi, by the way). I am tired of the lame and silly names such as bit, milli, micro.etc. Let's find some cool names. 

[DeathAndTaxes]

So since you felt the need to quote me from 2 years ago here is a new quote.

Millies, mBTC, mikes, uBTC have been proven to be horrible.  They are cludgy and nerdy and the chance of mainstream adoption is essentially zil.  Nothing has really happened after a couple years of pushing it. 

Bits is the only thing which has shown any momentum at all.  If BitPay starts using it, we will as well, hopefully others will and I have faith humans who can conceptualize a decentralized peer to peer currency system will be able to figure out bits.  "Bits" is a good colloquial for uBTC.  The idea that people won't be able to figure it out is just silly.  "That will be 22 bits please", short, simple, easy.  It still provides two decimal places which means easy integration into legacy accounting software.  We use uBTC internally for this exact reason.  Many accounting software packages can't handle the exchange rates or precision required to use either BTC or satoshis.  

[phillipsjk]

Also the nice thing is that since bit (general nonbitcoin word) is a discrete unit there is no such concept of sub bit.  Therefore without spelling out "coin" it becomes disambiguous that the speaker is talking about only bitcoin.

"Bits" is a good colloquial for uBTC.  The idea that people won't be able to figure it out is just silly.  "That will be 22 bits please", short, simple, easy.  It still provides two decimal places which means easy integration into legacy accounting software.

(Bold mine)

With a 180 degree turn like that, I am wondering if I should just convert all my BTC to dogecoin (it is more popular after all).

[DeathAndTaxes]

Feel free to sell your coins. I am more informed now than I was two years ago and hopefully will be more informed two years from now.  I also believed standardizing pricing mBTC was preferable but I now see that as a temporary measure which would probably need to be repeated again.  My opinions change based on new information and observations, most people call that learning.

[phillipsjk]

Feel free to sell your coins.

I am seriously considering selling a portion. If popularity rather than correctness is what is important, then it would be silly not to invest in the Alt with the highest transaction volume.

Dogecoin does not have this problem because the unit in common usage (1 doge) is worth such a small amount of money (ignoring financial software integration concerns -- that would be an implementation detail: a correctness thing.)

[DooMAD]

Pretty sure people are still going to refer to them as microbits or bits regardless of whatever other names you keep coming up with.  It's hardly a "controversy".  Call them what you like, but don't expect people to agree with you because you think that posting a poll on a forum is going to change peoples' minds.  All the time you're arguing about it, more people are jumping on board with Bitcoin and learning the existing names.  So the longer you take to reach an agreement, the less likely you are to convince everyone to stop using microbits (or bits for short).  I've only been around crypto for half a year or so, and microbits is now firmly and forever burned into my consciousness.

[DeathAndTaxes]

Feel free to sell your coins.

I am seriously considering selling a portion. If popularity rather than correctness is what is important, then it would be silly not to invest in the Alt with the highest transaction volume.

Dogecoin does not have this problem because the unit in common usage (1 doge) is worth such a small amount of money (ignoring financial software integration concerns -- that would be an implementation detail: a correctness thing.)

Sounds like a super investing strategy.  Obviously the nominal units not the actual value being transacted is what matters.