Everything is fixable. Just bad timing that the namechange topic intersects with my personal project :smile:.
I'd rather see the coin fare well with a given new name then being held back all because it has a (publicly negative sounding) name to it.
What's in a name? ...or, is a rose by any othername worth the trouble?
- Thread starter strix
- Start date
I'd rather see the coin fare well with a given new name then being held back all because it has a (publicly negative sounding) name to it.
jpr
Well-known member
I also think the present name has gotten us where we are now. But it is not going to take us much further than dark markets adoption, some gambling and maybe some porn industry. I think the further mass adoption is being held a bit because of this "shady" name. With all the potential darkcoin has got with the army of masternodes we need to change to something that is friendly to every Joe out there.
I even think this project could attract more developers who don't want to connect their identity with dark coin.
And yes we should get rid of "coin" word as every shitcoin got it and we need to be unique rather than just another coin.
I even think this project could attract more developers who don't want to connect their identity with dark coin.
And yes we should get rid of "coin" word as every shitcoin got it and we need to be unique rather than just another coin.
Maybe it would actually be a good idea to post the poll link here? Been reading trough the pages 3 times to discover it's not even posted
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=902675.0;all
I voted against a name change for the sake of sites that already adopted Darkcoin and need to implement (small) changes. Also personally working on a project related to the Darkcoin name and wouldn't be too happy if I had to redesign.
Think of the bigger picture
Your site will attract more visitors if Darkcoin/DASH is used in 100+ more markets and taken up by many more people.
alex-ru
Well-known member
IMHO:
No rename is needed now - until we will use current name completely: hear everywhere in the world (TV, Internet, ...: Darkcoin, bad darkcoin, good darkcoin, Darkcoin, Darkcoin, Darkcoin, Darkcoin, Darkcoin)
So when the market cap become of DRK > 1.000.000.000$ - It'll be time to think about rebranding to jump to the next level.
On the current level "Darkcoin" didn't used even 1% of it's PR potential yet.
No rename is needed now - until we will use current name completely: hear everywhere in the world (TV, Internet, ...: Darkcoin, bad darkcoin, good darkcoin, Darkcoin, Darkcoin, Darkcoin, Darkcoin, Darkcoin)
So when the market cap become of DRK > 1.000.000.000$ - It'll be time to think about rebranding to jump to the next level.
On the current level "Darkcoin" didn't used even 1% of it's PR potential yet.
TaoOfSatoshi
Well-known member
I think the concern with that is that it will be harder to perform a name change the more ingrained Darkcoin is in the world. At this point, it would be a challenge to do it, but nowhere near as hard as it would be later.
This really is a case of the sooner the better...
Put in this light, the sooner a decision (not implementation) is made the better. The poll closes end of december and by my guestimate there is still room for community input afterwards so it's gonna take another few weeks at least.
Edit; Just trying to adjust my expectancy.
Last edited by a moderator:
TaoOfSatoshi
Well-known member
---CLEARING THE AIR---
by Tao Of Satoshi
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=902675.msg9927941#msg9927941
by Tao Of Satoshi
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=902675.msg9927941#msg9927941
InvalidDecimal
New member
Read through all this thread and just thought I should chime in here...
I originally became involved with DRK because of the controversial name (and rising value of course). But, I would assume that by now everyone who likes the name is already involved - That market segment has already been skimmed. I do agree that the name is a limiting factor to mainstream adoption for "normal" businesses though. It gives a shady impression.
One could even say it's a limiting factor to the DarkMarket / Gambling / Porn / Privacy industry in some ways. Think about it: at first glance one would assume that "those" industries is all the coin is used for. Let us imagine DRK is a little more mature than it is now and has already been adopted by those industries. Lets say you're buying some drugs or whatever online, obviously you're going to want to be as "under the radar" as possible with this transaction. If you're buying DarkCoin, people may already assume "DarkCoin eh, he's doing something shady". So people may be more tempted to use BitCoin or something with a "lighter" name for those kinds of transactions purely because BitCoin blends in with all the potential "lighter" transactions it could be used for.
What I'm saying is: why would a DarkMarket adopt a currency that's specifically for illegal transactions? "'They' must have all eyes on this one". I'm aware that this obviously isn't the case but whether you like it or not - that's the first impression people get, and many won't bother to look any further.
So whilst the name may turn away legit business, it may also turn away "dark" businesses because why would they use a currency specifically for "dodgy shit"?
We could also argue that the name and the controversy it holds is what this coin's all about, it's our image and when people bother to take a look inside they'll realise it's not all that. But again many won't bother to look inside.
I do kinda like 'DASH': Digital Anonymous Secure Holdings - Instant transactions, there in a dash!
But a namechange definitely shouldn't be taken lightly, everything should be considered.
TL;DR:
FOR:
- Has the name DarkCoin already pretty much attracted the market segment which approves of the name, and is it now a limiting factor to mainstream adoption?
- Could the name even turn away "Darker" industries due to its connotation: why use a coin specifically for "dodgy shit" when you can use one that blends in with "lighter" dealings?
AGAINST:
- The controversy the name brings is probably what got most of us interested
- Could a namechange hurt the brand?
I think I'm leaning towards FOR a name change. But I'm gonna give myself a few days to think this one over before voting.
EDIT: How hilarious would this be...
LightCoin - Faster than the speed of light!
The fact that it changed its name from Dark to Light... Just lol, everyone who knows about DRK will definitely come take another look. Not to mention how it'd seriously ruffle the feathers of the LTC community because of the fact it's pronounced exactly the same and is better in every way. But what abbreviation could it use?
But yeah, we could still use a name that stirs shit haha. But this way it'd be stiring shit within the crypto community instead of amongst outsiders who may be interested otherwise.
I'm not suggesting "definitely do this" btw, just throwing it out there. Definitely a risky one.
I originally became involved with DRK because of the controversial name (and rising value of course). But, I would assume that by now everyone who likes the name is already involved - That market segment has already been skimmed. I do agree that the name is a limiting factor to mainstream adoption for "normal" businesses though. It gives a shady impression.
One could even say it's a limiting factor to the DarkMarket / Gambling / Porn / Privacy industry in some ways. Think about it: at first glance one would assume that "those" industries is all the coin is used for. Let us imagine DRK is a little more mature than it is now and has already been adopted by those industries. Lets say you're buying some drugs or whatever online, obviously you're going to want to be as "under the radar" as possible with this transaction. If you're buying DarkCoin, people may already assume "DarkCoin eh, he's doing something shady". So people may be more tempted to use BitCoin or something with a "lighter" name for those kinds of transactions purely because BitCoin blends in with all the potential "lighter" transactions it could be used for.
What I'm saying is: why would a DarkMarket adopt a currency that's specifically for illegal transactions? "'They' must have all eyes on this one". I'm aware that this obviously isn't the case but whether you like it or not - that's the first impression people get, and many won't bother to look any further.
So whilst the name may turn away legit business, it may also turn away "dark" businesses because why would they use a currency specifically for "dodgy shit"?
We could also argue that the name and the controversy it holds is what this coin's all about, it's our image and when people bother to take a look inside they'll realise it's not all that. But again many won't bother to look inside.
I do kinda like 'DASH': Digital Anonymous Secure Holdings - Instant transactions, there in a dash!
But a namechange definitely shouldn't be taken lightly, everything should be considered.
TL;DR:
FOR:
- Has the name DarkCoin already pretty much attracted the market segment which approves of the name, and is it now a limiting factor to mainstream adoption?
- Could the name even turn away "Darker" industries due to its connotation: why use a coin specifically for "dodgy shit" when you can use one that blends in with "lighter" dealings?
AGAINST:
- The controversy the name brings is probably what got most of us interested
- Could a namechange hurt the brand?
I think I'm leaning towards FOR a name change. But I'm gonna give myself a few days to think this one over before voting.
EDIT: How hilarious would this be...
LightCoin - Faster than the speed of light!
The fact that it changed its name from Dark to Light... Just lol, everyone who knows about DRK will definitely come take another look. Not to mention how it'd seriously ruffle the feathers of the LTC community because of the fact it's pronounced exactly the same and is better in every way. But what abbreviation could it use?
But yeah, we could still use a name that stirs shit haha. But this way it'd be stiring shit within the crypto community instead of amongst outsiders who may be interested otherwise.
I'm not suggesting "definitely do this" btw, just throwing it out there. Definitely a risky one.
Last edited by a moderator:
stan.distortion
Well-known member
Fwiw, just adding my 2c, not read through the whole thread.
Change the name? HELL NO!!
Why?
Bitcoin will be mainstream when most don't know they're using it (ie. Linux and Android), same goes for Darkcoin and its advanced features.
Financial snake oil sellers won't want to associate with anything that even hints at the true nature of their business.
The name appeals to a demographic supportive of disruptive tech (the popularity of the Pirate Party is a good example).
...
Change the name? HELL NO!!
Why?
Bitcoin will be mainstream when most don't know they're using it (ie. Linux and Android), same goes for Darkcoin and its advanced features.
Financial snake oil sellers won't want to associate with anything that even hints at the true nature of their business.
The name appeals to a demographic supportive of disruptive tech (the popularity of the Pirate Party is a good example).
...
oblox
Well-known member
But that then begs the question: Do we exclude the demographic outside of that? Seems obvious that the people supportive in that demographic could care less on the name situation, as long as the technology works. Playing devil's advocate here.
That's an interesting read on TaoOfSatoshi site https://www.rebelmouse.com/GetIntoTheDark/dartnell-on-drk-whats-in-a-bra-894406153.html
And suddenly it raises questions I didn't actually thought that much... What numbers are we targeting at as 100%? Or to rephrase this - how much is 2.5%? Where is the redline for us to switch from innovators to early adopters? How do we get there? Can we get there with "Darkcoin" brand or not? What name/features/any other conditions we need to get there?
And suddenly it raises questions I didn't actually thought that much... What numbers are we targeting at as 100%? Or to rephrase this - how much is 2.5%? Where is the redline for us to switch from innovators to early adopters? How do we get there? Can we get there with "Darkcoin" brand or not? What name/features/any other conditions we need to get there?
oblox
Well-known member
And that's the exact reason for this discussion. To weigh out what it would take to get to the "end game" and the pros and cons of doing so. This is the chance for the community to really give some thought about things, namely the future. Hopefully the foundation will weigh in on the matter as so far, they have been silent (at least in here). This should be the last of the discussion--everything gets pooled together here, disseminated and if the end result is the name stays, then any future discussions brought up simply get linked to this location. Done.
I don't think changing the name will have any benefit in terms of adoption that is distinguishable from noise. It would be a complete waste of time at best and probably counterproductive in that what little attention we get as Darkcoin would disappear when we renamed ourselves GenericMarketingDepartmentApprovedBanalityCoin, EyesGlazeOverCoin, HarmlessCoin, YawnCoin...
Bitcoin adoption is practically zero in real world terms. That has nothing to do with the name either.
Last edited by a moderator:
stan.distortion
Well-known member
In the narrow view and purely from a personal aspect I'd say yes and even suggest considering naming new features with the intention of repelling certain demographics that have become involved with Bitcoin as its image has become more mainstream.
From a wider view I don't think Bitcoin, Darkcoin, Litecoin or any other name will really signify in the long run as I see the concept single chains morphing into overlapping chains re-enforcing each other, something like side chains but more akin to a woven rope of cryptographic methods and features with place holders in alternative methods. That's off topic for here though, the future of cryptos as a whole is changing very quickly and imho considering them as individual and isolated could hide the bigger picture, one where "InstantX" may have far more significance than "Darkcoin".
I don't think Darkcoin could ever be boring, by any name. To be honest, I started wondering how we could be at #6, #7, #5 in market cap. The only reason I can think of is the one that keeps being slapped in our face; our name. We have it all, and I mean ALL, except apparently, the name.
I want Darkcoin, Evan's baby, Evan's blood sweat and tears to become THE currency of the future, because I'm a mad old lady, and I've made the boy my idle, LOL. And now I only see the name as standing in our way, no matter how much I used to like the name, I've changed my mind. It's holding us back, and I see the writing on the wall now. I was a die hard Darkcoin name lover. My husband still likes Darkcoin, says we're wimps to bend to the will of the people, but I say that's stupid talk. This is a business, a product in the end, and you don't go against your potential customers.
Would any of us leave because of a name change? How many? 5%? And what's the potential for new investors because of a name change? I'm betting a lot more than 5%. I'd bet more like 200% to >1000X adoption (over time).
I think a name change is in our future, or our future will be limited and short.
Oh my gosh, it's at #11 right now, by what logic?
I want Darkcoin, Evan's baby, Evan's blood sweat and tears to become THE currency of the future, because I'm a mad old lady, and I've made the boy my idle, LOL. And now I only see the name as standing in our way, no matter how much I used to like the name, I've changed my mind. It's holding us back, and I see the writing on the wall now. I was a die hard Darkcoin name lover. My husband still likes Darkcoin, says we're wimps to bend to the will of the people, but I say that's stupid talk. This is a business, a product in the end, and you don't go against your potential customers.
Would any of us leave because of a name change? How many? 5%? And what's the potential for new investors because of a name change? I'm betting a lot more than 5%. I'd bet more like 200% to >1000X adoption (over time).
I think a name change is in our future, or our future will be limited and short.
Oh my gosh, it's at #11 right now, by what logic?
Last edited by a moderator:
TaoOfSatoshi
Well-known member
Tante, I thought just like you until I read this article by Philip Dartnell called "What's in a brand name?" that's on my site right now...
www.rebelmouse.com/GetIntoTheDark/DarkBlogs
Maybe it will change your mind, too!
I just read that article, and I see him making the wrong conclusions. As he said here:
"Well, one can't forecast the future accurately, but my perception is that five years to a decade from now, as has happened with every other disruptive technology, attitudes will most likely change. Darkcoin will be attacked and cursed and have all sorts of innuendo thrown at it that it's a nefarious financial tool for criminals. But if the Darkcoin developers and community stay strong and maintain the core ethos that it's about the human right to financial privacy, the slings and arrows will eventually fall by the wayside and the mainstream will start to come round as to what it is and why it's such a necessary thing."
I don't think it will get that far. Someone will copy Darkcoin, give it a better name, and that is the coin that will take off. Why? Because it's not worth the effort to "educate" the masses. I think the disruptive technology of cryptocurrency will move very fast. Andreas Antonopoulos pegs it at 8 years into the future. 8 years is NOTHING! It's lightning fast. It's better to get this out of the way sooner than later.
Like I said before, I think the controversy over the name has served us well up to this point, but I believe we now need to "grow up" and re-brand. Preferably keeping some of our "look" and recognition. I read the entire article, but still disagree with his conclusions.
BTW, I did try to open my mind to his argument, and it is indeed the way I used to feel, but my gut tells me we need to move on now. We already have those #1 and #2 people, we have them. We are at the end of the small left section of the bell curve now, and we must be in the lead of adoption, along with Bitcoin, or we will LOSE to some lame coin, like Litecoin. Despite being better in every way to both. Don't' get me started on the other coins ahead of us on the coin market cap...
If I may continue, LOL, sorry! I'm a little tipsy, LOL, we are entering that mass of people, the general population. They're starting to take notice, they are starting to know about Bitcoin. They will NOT learn which coin is worthy, they'll invest/use the most popular. When we hit that mass, we need to be THE most popular! Why? Why can't we stay in our lovely little niche market? Because we deserve to be the world's currency! We deserve it and should be it! LOL, forgive me, I'm drinking too much Bailey's (but not from a shoe!) LOL
Why give ourselves a handicap for the future?
Last edited by a moderator:
crowning
Well-known member
As long as products with _really_ stupid and (from an promotional point of view) bad names can succeed because they deliver I wouldn't change a thing.
Just ask your preferred advertising guy (with some psychology-background) what he thinks about product names like:
- micro and soft
- apple
- sap
- gaga
- pay pal
- amazon
...
I'm pretty sure if they had known their future success AND had consulted a professional beforehand they had chosen completely different names.
I always thought 'amazon' was some ironic tree-chomping reference to how much goddamn paper and cardboard they get through.
Also: Google. I guarantee you that was a result of beer and weed, not a small fortune spent on market research.
Also: Google. I guarantee you that was a result of beer and weed, not a small fortune spent on market research.