This has been a bit of a long-standing debate on Slack (#trading). The proposal (and community vote) is to change the name Decred to Dcred. At the end of this thread I will link to a poll, but please read the rest of the post before voting -- it is imperative you are familiar with the reasoning. Speaking from personal experience, when I first saw the name deCRED (as per the logo on the homepage), the first image that popped into my mind was that of subtracting funds (de-credit, take away credit). It turns out I'm not alone in this opinion as it has been voiced heavily on Slack as well. Here's a design blog that goes into depth regarding the design process for the branding: https://medium.com/eeter/decred-dev...gn-system-for-a-digital-currency-17df76ab67c8 A few important points I wanted to point out from this blog post: "The initial version of the logo was written in capital-italic letters DECRED and placed in a context with darker color scheme. Because of that some people made the connections of “Dis Credit”, “Not Credible” “Decry” etc. This was an issue as we would not want it to epistemologically represent discrediting (removing credibility). In order to minimize the negative connotations and help develop new associations smoothly and without friction we began dissecting the typography of the wordmark." And in regard to the old triangular logo: "Another problem besides the lack of distinctiveness was that when scaled down, Nabla simplifies to a downwards arrow. This might have become a huge passive issue in the long run since Decred’s symbol will primarily be in a trading context. There you have candlestick charts pointing up or down. Who on earth would want to see their assets having a negative direction? The downward direction is an issue i’ve noticed with several financial logos — quite recently with Nordea rebranding. I think if you’re dealing with financial stuff having any negative or downward trend hiding in your symbol is pretty much as bad as having subliminal dickbutt somewhere in there." So it is evident that avoiding subliminal negative-sentiment cues was supremely important to the designers -- in particular due to the financial orientation of the project, and I think their changes have merit, but I think the problem still remains. Not because of the look of the branding but because of the spelling itself. So this is a proposal to change the name to Dcred (or dCred if you prefer that capitalization). This has the benefit of removing the negative sentiment -- instead of thinking "anti-cred", you think "d cred", where it is obvious the d is the first letter of the another word, opposed to being a preposition. It also has the benefit of removing the ambiguity surrounding the pronunciation (is it deh-kred, dec-red or dee-cred). The benefit of this approach as opposed to a full rename (we discussed the idea of changing the name to "cred" with the domain "cred.it") is that we don't lose any existing brand traction within the marketplace which is very important, and it requires less overall documentation and branding changes (no change to the ticker symbol required, no change to the logo required except for the word component). I think this proposal is a good middle ground. I'm not a designer, but I've modified the logo to show what it could look like: Just as a bit of affirmation that the problem still exists, I asked (out of the blue) my crypto-investor friend on his thoughts of the name and this was the conversation: I understand this is only a sample size of 1 (minus the other supporters in slack), so hopefully we can get some more confirmation here if this is indeed a problem that still remains. Branding changes are best addressed early as a change in the future will require a lot more work, and it's important to reduce the brand recognition-loss surface as much as possible. I would also like to point out that on the homepage you have to hover over the logo for it to say <<decentralized credit>>, this should really be displayed by default (as has been pointed out in another thread). Poll is attached to this thread, please share your thoughts.
I feel the removal of the "e" does not take away from the fact that it's pronounced "decred", hence the same possible negative connotations. It does make the name look more awkward though. It'll probably also confuse new users into thinking it's "DC Red". Personally, I thought "decentralized credit" first time I saw the name decred.
Cross posting from Slack: Putting aside the debate of whether or not the name is good or bad (which is really subjective anyways), my opinion is that there is now significant brand recognition behind Decred. It's all over various forums, trollboxes, Twitter, Facebook, and other social media outlets. There is a growing library of Youtube videos that reference it, presentations have been given to well established companies such as Coinbase under the name, and there are several more ongoing efforts which aren't public yet that also use the name. Given all of this information, objectively, I think it would be a huge mistake to give up all of that brand recognition. There are countless examples of very large and well-known companies that use names which are questionable. For example, Microsoft, McDonald's, FedEx, Google, Apple, and Yahoo. However, regardless of whether those names are necessarily good or bad, they have incredibly strong brand recognition and thus changing them really wouldn't make any sense. Further, there are plenty of words that start with the "de" prefix that are not negative and we don't think twice about it. Take, for example, the word debrief. Would you argue that means "to take away" a brief(ing) or is otherwise somehow negative? How about with demeanor? Does that evoke thoughts of "taking away" something? Yet a third example is detect, which is in fact, actually about discovery, something distinctly positive. A fourth example is development, which is about creating and improving things. Yes, there are lots of examples to the contrary as well where words that start with "de" also have a negative connotation, but the point should be clear now that it's simply a matter of recognition.
Decred has a year of building up reputation now. Changing the name would undo all of that, and likely cripple the coin's spread for 2 more years. As for the negative connotations of "de-," I'll have to get back to you after I get in decar and drive to destore to buy degroceries.
I think we just stumbled onto a brilliant marketing strategy... de marketing of de decred will never be de same on deplanet!
Control delanguage and you control dedestiny. Use de powers wisely decredizens. http://www.morewords.com/starts-with/de/
Definitely a severe exaggeration. It's not changing the name, it's changing the spelling of the existing name by removing a single letter. In reality most people won't even notice the change. Anyway, if we're going to pretend like words like "deadlock" are the same as "defaming" then I'll begin pronouncing it as its rightful name "dehk-red" and we can all move on.
By all means, throw a temper tantrum in the form of making yourself sound like an idiot. I'm certain that's the key that will convince everyone here that we should actually listen to you.
Let's all calm down and be civil to each other. @nullbio, this is definitely a matter of personal taste. Both arguments carry some weight behind them, so a democratic vote to show what the majority supports is not a bad idea at all. It seems though that the majority thinks the current name is more appropriate. Your efforts are of course appreciated as you meant well for the coin, so thanks.
Woah, calm down. You're the only one here throwing a tantrum. I stand by what I said. Indeed, I have no problem accepting that, if the majority think it should remain then this process has worked as intended and we've gathered useful information -- excellent. In fact the only reason I made this post was because I had a conversation with some other members on slack who said it would be a good idea to have an official proposal & poll, and I was the only one willing to put the work in to make it happen. I do however have a problem with hyperbole and mockery (@ClokworkGremlin) in the face of sound reasoning and logic, clearly this person is overly emotional. I was aiming for a constructive debate, and trolling with childish comments is far from constructive. Thank you @anvoice and other contributors for keeping things civil.
I think this matter has been already addressed in the rebranding as you've only quoted the problem part from the medium article … The old logo had an lack of explanation what decred actually meant. It was one big block of allcaps. Now there is a clear hint + supportive communication work done on that part. Imo decred = strong, unique and established name. Removing one "e" won't specifically solve anything or make it more likeable. Also there is the currency code DCR, which following thought train even further? But then there is no personality left. Can't ever please everybody, so better to be confident in what we've got and not try to hide it. Eventually negative or positive stance depends on the perspective, there is always opportunities to be found in the negative also.
Are you referring to the "<<Decentralized Credit>>" part under the logo? That only displays if you hover over it.
So I've been involved in a large, public project that went through a name change partway through (and it was a name change that we knew would happen from day one but we could not start with the final name initially due to political reasons). It is a huge pain in the ass and a taks a tremendous amount of time. Based on that, I would NEVER encourage a change of name in a project once it is public (or really once a certain amount of code has been written) unless there was a serious need (legal reasons, etc.). Any thing just wastes time that could be spent elsewhere and will lead to bugs, broken links, etc.
I was referring to the wordmark –> character weight difference, lower case + small caps. Throughout all the communications done – there is a lot more focus in general on referencing the meaning behind the name. That easter egg under the logo at decred.org is one of many examples. Who wants to know will eventually find out.
Random thoughts. Bad meaning of "de" is just perception. What I love about Decred team is that they don't play games with my mind. I did have some weird "de" associations at first but once I got it ("decentralized") my perception changed and now it makes so much sense. It's freaking me out when banks draw green upwards arrows implying I will magically succeed by joining them. They're selling upfront some imagined "success" without bothering what useful activity will lead to it. They're simply saying: "Dude! Success here! How? Green arrow upwards of course, you fool! Now take our debt!" There is a subtle difference between communicating better what you already have and what you stand for (principles first) and guessing words and logos that are easier sold to people (money first). Coca Cola pushes so hard to build an association with happiness. They picture happy looking people with bottles. I'm sure they have zero principles because if they were after world happiness they would do something more useful than convincing me that bottled acid is happiness. I hope Decred will not fall into that. Imho what is more critical right now is exposing already existing value - a good GUI, better docs, more educational articles, good voting visualization, etc. P.S. Pls dn't rmove th vwels frm th nme.
Well, with my technical backround and 30+ years working experience I can only say that man should not fix what is not broken .
Let's put it this way. People are uninformed and they make assumptions. Those two characteristics can be pretty dangerous together, but if they want to learn, they will. Making assumptions about Decred based on a lack of information can lead to the negative connotations the name might suggest, but that can quickly and easily be negated by visiting the forums or reading the Decred docs. That's a whole lot easier than rebranding the project this far into the game. I think this would be a great issue to demonstrate and learn the mainnet voting process. I'm not saying it's an unimportant issue, but it is a less severe issue than something such as a block size shift or a redistribution of the block reward, and I'd rather learn the stake voting process on a smaller issue than a larger one. I don't want to derail this thread, so I will create another thread for discussion, but this conversation brings up another good point: (the process for selecting issues that will be included in future stake voting issues). Link here: https://forum.decred.org/threads/voting-proposal-process.5232/
Hello, New to the forum, but wanted to toss in my $.02 on the matter. My background is apparel with lots of emphasis on branding. While poorly derived names can be overcome, they can also present unnecessary obstacles. Unfortunately the name deCRED kept me from further investigating the platform for a few months. With new blockchains and alt coins popping up almost daily, and time as a limited resource, we all have to triage opportunities and this decision unfortunately comes down to something as silly as a name sometimes. Here are a few thoughts I hope are helpful. I didn't associate deCRED with "decentralized credits" until visiting the forum. Only now do I see that the page title for decred.org reads "Decentralized Credit" on my browser tab (had to close a few tabs to read it all). The concept of decentralized credit is extremely compelling and the fact that this is not more easily discernible in the name deCRED to me indicates a problem. Part of this problem seems to stem from the use of the root word "de". While I now see that this is intended to convey decentralization, this wasn't obvious to a longtime crypto enthusiast like myself and would be even more foreign for the average individual. This is due to the fact that the prefix "de" has a longstanding use in the English language which cannot be easily redefined, while the word "decentralized" has a complex meaning which cannot be conveyed with the prefix "de". While the design team identified the negative connotations inherent in the name, it seems they did little to overcome them. Changing DECRED to deCRED seems to only emphasize the prefix and it's inherent meaning whereas the all caps versions seems to flow as a single word. To further emphasize point three take this history of the prefix "de" from dictionary.com: Given this historical English use of the prefix "de" it is easy to see how deCRED can be misunderstood to mean "to lower one's credit to the bottom". Clearly this is not the intention. It deems the suggestion to change the name to dCred, dCRED, or Dcred is more successful in removing these negative connotations. While the isolated "d" sheds the inherently negative connotations "de" it has the added benefit of more clearly alluding to decentralization. While apple has trained us to understand that the letter "i" prefixed to a word implies a more complex meaning than it's given definition (to refer to oneself), so has the letter "D" begun to adopt the more complex meaning of decentralization. For example consider the abundant use of the abbreviated "Dapps" (http://dapps.ethercasts.com). Adopting a similar naming scheme allows Decred to gleen the positive connotations and legitimacy of such use while more clearly conveying the decentralized nature of the platform. I respectfully disagree due to the reasons above. Though this is not directly quantifiable, any recognition perceived as "lost" by changing the name from "decred" to "dcred" would likely be negligible. Any potential loss of recognition would be further mitigated by the fact that the digital asset associated with the project is already noted as "dcr". Upon further scrutiny, your examples seem to further emphasize the negative connotation of decred. For example, "detect" comes from the root words "de" meaning "to remove" and "tect" meaning "roof or covering". Detect therefore means "to remove the covering of" as "decred" would imply "to remove the credit of". While the undoing nature of the root "de" is not inherently negative, it can be conveyed as such depending on its accompanying root word.