What's in a name? ...or, is a rose by any othername worth the trouble?

I am posting this quote from BCT because I thought it was a fairly cogent statement that I would like to address later when I have a chance..

I have not forgotten this thread, and hope to post a rather comprehensive summary when I have more time than I do at present. At the moment the demands of work, family, and task for the DRK Ambassadors group needs to take precedence.

[quote author=wozzek23 link=topic=421615.msg10520266#msg10520266 date=1424418898]
[quote author=coins101 link=topic=421615.msg10518276#msg10518276 date=1424395369]
[quote author=tungfa link=topic=421615.msg10518101#msg10518101 date=1424393432]
Which altcoins and why

https://letstalkbitcoin.com/blog/post/which-altcoins-and-why
8)
[/quote]

Like I said, the name works for now, but not for mass adoption.
[/quote]

Yes, you did say it, some 15 million times :) :) <== just kidding.

No one knows is adoption in the cards at all. And what is the "mass adoption," pray, 10% of the world population or 0.01% of the world citizenry? Even the latest number, 1 out of 10,000 people would represent 722,560 people all over the world using Darkcoin.

So, now think of 2,395 members on https://darkcointalk.org/ or 2,180 masternodes in total vs. 722,560 people if only 1 out 10,000 people would "adopt" Darkcoin, or even just 72,256 people if only 1 out of 100,000 in the whole wide world adopts it. Still a way to go, no? We are at the lunatic fringe of a new era. Even the BTC, with about 64,000 businesses accepting bitcoins (as of October 7, 2014, per CoinDesk, 2014, The state of Bitcoin Q2 2014) has a paltry number of coins actually used for purchasing goods and services. 1 out of 40,000 transactions made in the world were made using bitcoin. (from the Study I am referring to below)

More than half of the bitcoins in circulation have not been used in transactions the past three months and about a third have not been used in the past year. (from the Federal Reserve Study, no less, titled "Bitcoin: Technical Background and Data Analysis"). While I have no clue how many Darkcoins are being used for real transactions, I know that, as of yesterday, 42% of all available Darkcoins are "locked in" the Mastenodes, so, all this is a highly speculative game for everyone that is NOT directly involved like the developers and / or several big investors. (also speculating)

When I read the study (Bitcoin: Technical Background and Data Analysis) I find one thing very encouraging: BTC is NOT widely used because it does NOT solve the problem / need for the users. Credit cards are faster and it, BTC, does not provide anonymity, does not secure anyone's privacy etc.

Herein comes Darkcoin to fulfill these needs.

But, how many people would really value their privacy and anonymity, given the billions idiots sharing their lives, for free on flashbooks of today's world, thusly enriching the owners of their content? I have no clue. Perhaps 1%, perhaps 0.1%?

And for these the name - DARKCOIN - will not represent a problem.


[/quote]
 
Sorry for bad English thanks:

I'm still quite interesting to innovative coin, I dont wish to criticise the Darkcoin (Xcoin), I only have problem with Darkcoin's name: in my opinion "Darkcoin" maybe not okay looking, Bitcoin sees neutral name, Darkcoin seems shady name, I'm little worry about what community first think/hear to name Darkcoin?

I saw evolution of Darkcoin's logo, recent logo is fresh, cool and strong!
Yes of course "D" keeps, only my view word "dark" (in economic psychology/market) I dont know... :what:


T.
 
I'm quite a fan of the "Dash - Digital Cash" concept. I think it's clever and could really work. The 'Dark' element to this coin will always hang over it, no matter how much we try to explain our fundamentals. As it begins with a 'D' would we keep our 'D' emblem? I think that it looks great and could work for Dash too.
 
vertoe said:
Why a new thread?
Click to expand...

I read a while back a discussion on DRK name, but never followed. With this new announcement, idk, thought it made sense. If its redundant, please close it. I'll take a look at moli's link

EDIT: apparently that thread is closed
 
dash-explained.png
 
I don't get it. What is wrong with "Dark"? Since when "Dark" is a "bad" thing and why should we attach negative connotation to "dark"? Darkness and Light balances each other- just like matter and dark-matter and just like transparency/openness and privacy. If Dark is "bad" then light also should be equally 'bad". For some things in life we need transparency and for others we need to stay in the dark and stay private. That does not necessarily mean dark is criminal or illegal. It just means, my financial information is nobody's damn business.

Besides, this name issue have been brought up by various community members dozens of times before and every time it met a strong objection from Evan. Why change it now after Darkcoin became a globally recognized brand and lots of major media outlets have written about it, and we are at top 5 in coinmarketcap. I am strongly against changing the name and especially changing it now. I think it can even backfire.

P.S. Obviously, we don't know the full story behind Evan's decision to bring up this name change issue. If the hidden part of the story is about a a billion dollar investor who is willing to invest in Darkcoin but demands a name change, then yes, lets change the name ;)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top