Propose to change terminology

[10c]

Since we are still in chasm we can easily change this to the correct terminology.
Just like we are starting to make mBTC the norm we should also change to exchanging fiat for (m)BTC.
You do this when you for example want to exchange your $$ for €€.

People have a hard time "buying" a currency @$550 per 1.
Do we treat BTC as stock or do we treat BTC as currency?
Now that pp/ebay might be coming aboard it might be better if we exchange over inflating fiat which requires 0 hashpower to the deflating CURRENCY bitcoin.

Of course BTC is a great investment, but I don't usually pay my local supermarket with bonds or shares.

[Parazyd]

Most of this forum treats Bitcoin as a stock, that's the bad thing.
But yeah, we should start calling it "exchanging", but not that it matters much.

[freedomno1]

Hmm, well it is just a clerical change to the terminology and lexicon

Either one works for me in a conversation depends on how you phrase it.
You can buy one bitcoin at Bitstamp
You can exchange for one bitcoin at Bitstamp

[Ron~Popeil]

Most of this forum treats Bitcoin as a stock, that's the bad thing.
But yeah, we should start calling it "exchanging", but not that it matters much.

That will change as more merchants come on board. The utility as a payment system is only just beginning to show itself. 

[10c]

That will change as more merchants come on board. The utility as a payment system is only just beginning to show itself. 

Very true but WE here set an example for many so if we start using the right terminology that would help a lot

[TwinWinNerD]

It will be called exchanging bitcoins, when its ready.

Don't force terminology. People use it for a reason, even if its unconcious.

[Ron~Popeil]

That will change as more merchants come on board. The utility as a payment system is only just beginning to show itself. 

Very true but WE here set an example for many so if we start using the right terminology that would help a lot

These things tend to happen organically. I just don't see it as an issue but it is fun to talk about. I think bits would be the most logical.

[waldox]

bitcoiners should use terms that implicate neutral technology ideas vs financial/currency terms that implicate tax/legal issues
what we think about (words we use) become what we get
law of attraction here
so bitcoin, implicates a financial issue when in fact if we use bitp2p or something like that its a technology idea not financial idea
and will be subject to less legal problems

[Benjig]

Since we are still in chasm we can easily change this to the correct terminology.
Just like we are starting to make mBTC the norm we should also change to exchanging fiat for (m)BTC.
You do this when you for example want to exchange your $$ for €€.

People have a hard time "buying" a currency @$550 per 1.
Do we treat BTC as stock or do we treat BTC as currency?
Now that pp/ebay might be coming aboard it might be better if we exchange over inflating fiat which requires 0 hashpower to the deflating CURRENCY bitcoin.

Of course BTC is a great investment, but I don't usually pay my local supermarket with bonds or shares.

We can use the terminology currency but then we can change to mBTC instead of BTCs, people will buy easily bitcoins knowing that they worth 0.650 usd / mBTC, thats cheap!.. and if they buy for example 500 mBTC that number will sound as an investment.

[Parazyd]

Since we are still in chasm we can easily change this to the correct terminology.
Just like we are starting to make mBTC the norm we should also change to exchanging fiat for (m)BTC.
You do this when you for example want to exchange your $$ for €€.

People have a hard time "buying" a currency @$550 per 1.
Do we treat BTC as stock or do we treat BTC as currency?
Now that pp/ebay might be coming aboard it might be better if we exchange over inflating fiat which requires 0 hashpower to the deflating CURRENCY bitcoin.

Of course BTC is a great investment, but I don't usually pay my local supermarket with bonds or shares.

We can use the terminology currency but then we can change to mBTC instead of BTCs, people will buy easily bitcoins knowing that they worth 0.650 usd / mBTC, thats cheap!.. and if they buy for example 500 mBTC that number will sound as an investment.

Yup. That's actually one of the bigger problems with new adopters who don't know all the things about BTC. And then Bitcoins seem expensive and they say that's too much for them and can't buy a Bitcoin. For what it's worth, we should really start telling people about decimal places and about uBTC and mBTC.

[10c]

The problem is that we are already start to use the term mBTC (just look around the forum), but the media will announce bitcoin @$1k instead of bitcoin back @$1/mBTC next month. People still see it as a stock because you 'buy' it; they see 1 btc as a share of the 21mil shares and thus don't see it is devisable to the point of satoshi's 

[okthen]

I don't agree with any of the answers.
I'd say "no", but not "because bitcoin isn't currency".
I still think that bitcoin can be both, and "buy/sell" are easy words, so let's stick with them.

[happyflylong]

Yes, good ideas.

For most people do not understand bitcoin, we should choose good  terminology to introduce bitcoin to these who know nothing about bitcoin.

Good  terminology will induce better  "envisage" which relating bitcoin with things people already know every day.