Topic: [neㄘcash, ᨇcash, net⚷eys, or viᖚes?] Name AnonyMint's vapor coin? - page 52. (Read 95256 times)

If the BS abbreviation might have negative connotation, perhaps consider SyncBits?

Network is Sync, which has Bits in there i.e SyncBits. And then later if there are apps like chat or anonymous web or markets or whatever, they could be SyncChat, SyncWeb, SyncMarkets etc. Or pegged assets like SyncDollars.

I've got a better idea for the social money that can be branded with no copycats. And will really stand out. And is easy to pronounce, write, and remember.

Asians love good luck charms and gambling. Everybody wants some more individual power.

mo·jo
: a power that may seem magical and that allows someone to be very effective, successful, etc.
"works his mojo on the tennis court"
: a ​quality that ​attracts ​people to you and makes you ​successful and ​full of ​energy

Mojo.money

Currency symbol = ♏, ₥, ￦, ₩, ☘, ♧, 🃏, 🃛, 😎, 😏, %, ⚮, ꙭ, Ꝏ, ✮, ✨, ⁰j⁰, or ⛀|⛀

m⛀j⛀
m❍j❍
m⬭j⬭
mΘjΘ
mʘjʘ
mꖴjꖴ
m⌾j⌾
m⍟j⍟
m◉j◉
m○j○
m◌j◌
m◯j◯
m⚪j⚪
m⚬j⚬
m⁰j⁰
m⟳j⟲
m⟲j⟳

Note the plural might be moji or mojoes instead mojos. Interesting it originates from creole, which is my birth culture (New Orleans).

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/mojo

Etymology
Probably of Creole origin, cognate with Gullah moco ‎(“witchcraft”), Fula moco'o ‎(“medicine man”)

mojo ‎(plural mojos or mojoes)

A magic charm or spell.
Supernatural skill or luck.
(slang) Personal magnetism; charm.
(slang) Sex appeal; sex drive.
(slang) Illegal drugs.



mo·jo
ˈmōjō/
noun
: a magic charm, talisman, or spell.
"someone must have their mojo working over at the record company"
: magic power.
: a power that may seem magical and that allows someone to be very effective, successful, etc.
"works his mojo on the tennis court"

---

Different proposals for Bitcoin's currency code:

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Bitcoin_symbol#Existing_Unicode_symbol

Today a Unicode characters was approved for Bitcoin's currency code:

https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/bitcoin-finally-gets-an-approved-unicode-character-point-1446580490

---

Edit: for the more serious currency unit, I think the name c⛀j⛀nes would be keeping with the same theme and could fit very well with the all male jockeying for position in this forum, lol.  

But Bits is not for them. The social/micro-tx currency is for them. Bits is a lower velocity of money variant for stability, i.e. for use in the programmable contracts on the block chain. Bits is the business use currency. That is why I thought associating it with the established leader Bitcoin would give it more acceptability. I think the paramount priority for the serious currency unit is familiarity, stability, reliability, and acceptance. This counters my statements above where I said Bits is non-descriptive. Yes and that is perfect for business where you don't want to pigeon-hole or make money too silly.


¥ will piss off the Chinese. Why did we favor Japan over China.

We just need to pick a brandable fun name for a social and micro-tx currency. I prefer the ꙭ currency symbol because it looks cute and friendly like two eyeballs (remember this is displayed in fun, non-serious social and micro-tx scenarios, not in business scenarios). Very unique and won't get anyone pissed off at us.

I can see that readers are ostensibly not factoring into their thought process that marketing is often about identifying distinct demographics. It seems we are sometimes conflating all the target markets together into one. Bitcoin already did that. We won't like find one name that reaches across all demographics better than Bitcoin. Instead what we can do is more precisely target distinct demographics by the use of separation-of-concerns (two currencies).

I believe there will be a stratification of preferences w.r.t. to crypto-money, because there are different priorities between business (stable store-of-value) use cases and social / mass market use cases.

Bits is too nondescript for the mass market which prefers "Candy Crunch" and "Angry Birds". Yet Cool, Chan, Vibes, Yoonits are not going to appeal as money to business users.

I think I am back to preferring Cool bits/cash/coin, because there are no copycat portmanteaus which can capture the same theme of "Cool".

Coolbits is a natural social media unit of Bits.

Yoobits is more personal, but there are too many variants, e.g. ibits, mebits, etc.. Also many people will wonder why just didn't spell "Youbits". And You bits is bit more confusing than Yourbits or mybits but then whose bits are these  . They are yours when I am going to send them to you and they are mine until I do.

Or we could try to dump Bits theme entirely but for what?

There are already other portmanteaus on Bit such a Bitz, Bitstar, Nubits, Bitpay. But doesn't that all promote Bits.

Or Syncro or Synchro

Syncyo is defensible because can't be placed into a similar portmanteau without violating the community's property (thus likely being ignored). But OTOH, if we don't use BitSync/Sync, then some other project is likely to use it.

I am not too much concerned about others copying our project name with variants. If Sync/BitSync has larger market adoption, it won't really matter what the other copycoins do.

Yoobits may or may not be worrisome. I'd prefer to have currency names which have no similar portmanteaus.

I had also presented the ideas iown (from ion and i-on) and mebit long ago.

Let's not forget ibits, which is also available.

nit is short for grump or nitpicker.

So now you can see why I was proposing to use for currency names Bits, Cool, and maybe Ching or Chan.

Once again I return my original instincts which is:

Network	Sync
Main currency	Bits
Social currency	Cool
Micro-tx currency	Ching or Chan

If anyone creates a portmanteau from those, then they are really just contributing to our brand.

The micro-tx currency is optional. We could go with just Bits and Cool to simplify.

If everyone prefers Chan over Cool then we could.

If there is another name we prefer for the social/micro-tx currency, such as Vibes then we could.

K.I.S.S.

Just before I go...


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

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.

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.

Fair enough.


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.

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.

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?

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.


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.


That I like.


Yes, I recall those.

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)?

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)

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.


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.

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)


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.

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.

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.

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 

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

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.