Tiptree (actually an English town) and Treet
I thought of Treet and Tiptree but tiptree.com is in use. Treet (sounds like ‘tweet’ and) is interesting but what USP does it convey? No association to a new paradigm of pyramidal tip tokenization.
Wanted to reply asap to admit that all the ideas in my prior post were really pitiful dog crap.
Tangentially Note: It’s been an arduous process for me. I haven’t always (or even often) been able maintain continuity of focus and thoughts while battling my gut health. It’s exasperating to conclude by the end of this message that my best name idea for the knowledge formation dApps originated 5 months ago. My energy level was well charged and healthy today while writing these messages today.
For example, the entire notion of conveying a tree structure (or even roots and branches) in a name is fraught with being conflated with (something about genealogy and) the ancestral tree. Ror this reason and others I rejected ideas such as Wikipedium, Wikitree, Wikilop and Wikispun. Lop meaning the branches lopped off from the main tree. Spun taken from spin-off and 3 of the meanings of spin related to presenting a unique perspective, extracting threads from balls of cotton and the process of weaving something from spun cotton. The term ‘wiki’ which originates from WikiWikiWeb as a replacement for the acronym World Wide Web (www.), already conceptualizes a community editable webpage, but lacks the concept of decentralized curation of a permissionless, multifurcation into variants of the page. Someone mentioned the actually catchy and sort of apropos idea Wikiweb, but seems to be recycled lacking originality? Are these simplistic two word juxtaposed portmanteaus even brandable and memorable? There’s too many variants of them.
Hivelop stands out (the ‘lop’ suffix less like a portmanteau?), emphasizes the groupwise collaboration and sounds more technological than Wikilop. Is it a less negative association in that the hive lops off the irrelevant twigs? Implying decentralized curation? Someone said it reminds the lopping off of rabbit ears, so I guess that’s NFG (no f*cking good). Hiveloop’s more positive. Loop could be interpreted as a round-trip medium such as a wiki where users can interact and edit the content, as opposed to TV which is one-way broadcast.
Another idea iOnion is for “peeling the onion” of variants of information. Pryamoni’s for the pyramid nature of the tokenization monetization+gamification, but not compelling nor professional enough to entice quality authors to post there. Resurrected the enviable Hivemind, but it historically conveyed a loss of individuality and conformance to groupthink. I considered Hiveminds plural or Swarmind to rectify the meaning, but seems dubious? Wikimesh, Swarmesh and Swarmedia are also available.
I was delayed trying to think of “the name” home run. Three mornings before I awoken with the name clean Slate delivered from a dream. But that wasn’t quite right, although it’s much more professional than other recent ideas. I don’t want quality authors to be turned off to publish at the site. Morning before yesterday I dreamt Sponge which absorbs all the information. Thus implying censorship resistance. A kid which is a ‘sponge’ absorbs all. It isn’t precisely the same as indelible, but with the site “absorbing everything” meaning it’s reasonably close and perhaps makes the name slightly professional from that perspective (if people don’t just think of cleaning the kitchen?). Sponge is unique, cute, one syllable, brandable, unique, stands out, and everyone in my generation and younger loves SpongeBob:
| Name | Domains |
|---|---|
| Hiveloop | (.com ₙₒₜ ᵢₙ ᵤₛₑ, .app/.co/.io/.me/.net/.org/.to/.us/.xyz ₙₒₜ ₜₐₖₑₙ) |
| Hivelop | (.app/.co/.com/.io/.me/.net/.org/.to/.us/.xyz ₙₒₜ ₜₐₖₑₙ) |
| Sponge | (.app/.me/.net/.org/.us ₙₒₜ ᵢₙ ᵤₛₑ, .com ᶠᵒʳ ˢᵃˡᵉ, .co $8500, .cafe/.center/.exposed/.id/.im/spong.ee /.es ₙₒₜ ₜₐₖₑₙ) |
| Wikiweb | (.net/.us ₙₒₜ ᵢₙ ᵤₛₑ, .io ᶠᵒʳ ˢᵃˡᵉ, .app/.co/.me/.network/.to/.xyz/.wiki ₙₒₜ ₜₐₖₑₙ) |
Sponge is applicable if interpreted as, “soak up a cornucopia of information.”
The “soaking up” is in an abstract interpretation is bidirectional in that the site soaks up (retains) and doesn’t discard nor burying anything by centralized decision. And users may soak up all that retained information. Would most just think of a utensil for washing dishes? Maybe they would think of a cleaning service. So Sponge is also NFG?
The negative association being that it isn't professional and given the popularity of SpongeBob then the first impression that it’s just for kids stuff. Maybe depends how it’s branded? SpongeBob association makes it memorable but the branding can disassociate from a cartoon character. The word ‘sponge’ isn’t SpongeBob and its meaning isn’t a cartoon character. Yet someone reiterated that many people may not even bother to check it out because of their first impression and the popularity of the childish SpongeBob meme.
Realms even if we presume the long-shot of people coming to understand “individualized dominions over any activity”, would still be very general and not specific to the specific dApp applications (i.e. those contemplated in my prior post) in the area of knowledge formation and information collation. Realms could possibly be conceptualized about generalized decentralization, but that doesn’t have a specific call-to-action— a very important facet of marketing.
For example, Sponge has a specific call-to-action of “soak up all the information.” But it may not be that compelling or readily interpreted that way?
So dissatisfied above, I returned to the keyword ‘peer’ as the concept that conveys our intended decentralized like-minded coteries better than ‘hive’. For example, ‘hivemind’ means the entire colony acts unified (which is antithetical to decentralization). Whereas, ‘peers’ act independently and relate to each other directly (aka the End-to-end principle).
Some of the following may be amongst ideas I had in the past and some may be new because I did an exhaustive search.
| Name | Domains |
|---|---|
| Coopeerate | (.app/.co/.com/.io/.me/.net/.org/.to/.us/.xyz ₙₒₜ ₜₐₖₑₙ) |
| Deepeer | (.com ₙₒₜ ᵢₙ ᵤₛₑ, .app/.co/.io/.me/.net/.org/.to/.us/.xyz ₙₒₜ ₜₐₖₑₙ) |
| Hypeermedia | (.app/.co/ |
| Peerallels | (.app/.co/.com/.io/.me/.net/.org/.to/.us/.xyz ₙₒₜ ₜₐₖₑₙ) |
| Peerank | (.com ₙₒₜ ᵢₙ ᵤₛₑ, |
| Peercolate | (.app/.co/.com/.io/.me/.net/.org/.to/.us/.xyz ₙₒₜ ₜₐₖₑₙ) |
| Peerfecto | (peerfect.com/.io/.org ₙₒₜ ᵢₙ ᵤₛₑ, peerfect.co $599, .app/.co/peerfec.to/ peerfect.me/ |
| Peersona | (.com ₙₒₜ ᵢₙ ᵤₛₑ, .app/.co/.io/.me/ |
| Supeerb | (.com ₙₒₜ ᵢₙ ₛₑᵣᵢₒᵤₛ ᵤₛₑ, |
| Transpeerent | (.app/.co/.com/.io/.me/.net/.org/.to/.us/.xyz/ transpee.rent ₙₒₜ ₜₐₖₑₙ) |
| Uncommons | (.co/.io/.org/uncommon.com ₙₒₜ ᵢₙ ₛₑᵣᵢₒᵤₛ ᵤₛₑ, .net/uncommon.org for sale, .art $425, uncommonuncomm.one ₙₒₜ ₜₐₖₑₙ) |
For the dApps cited, I like Deepeer, Hypeermedia, Peerallels, Peerank, Peerfecto, Supeerb and Uncommons. Of those my favorites are:
- Hypeermedia is most descriptive of a range of decentralization features but is 5 syllables and 11 characters long. Much superior marketing choice than my prior idea Hyperdata.
- Peerank succinctly describes but pigeonholes to a major USP (my name idea from 2015). Doesn’t convey anything about content, debate nor discussion.
- Peerfecto may be the most brandable of the ‘peer’ portmanteaus, Italiano flair, and speaks to “perfect it with peers” USP of the generalized benefit of leveraging peers in decentralization. I thought of ‘peerfect’ long ago. The suffixed ‘o’ adds zeal, differentiates from ‘defect’ and all the domains are available. Yet Peerfect may still be preferable. Perhaps this is a case where the first association (i.e. ‘perfect’) most people think of precludes the actual definition of ‘perfecto’. Although not explicit about peered content, debate or discussion, it implies such indirectly as does for example Quora (which originates from quorum).
- Supeerb is partially analogous to Peerfecto with 1 less syllable and 2 fewer characters, but more difficult to pronounce. It could be interpreted as superb peers instead of some result of peering.
- Uncommons other than as some nebulous Inverse Commons, may imply not only eclectic things but also that those things aren’t shared in common with everyone. Remember I wrote it targets the intellectual types: “seekers, epistemophiles, connoisseurs.” Thus it’s the antithesis of one-size-fits-all and thus implies peeranking. Returning to this name idea, I didn’t rejected it for the knowledge dApps (only inappropriate for the ledger or a unified project name) and frankly it’s still the most brandable, unique, and easy to pronounce.
I like Peersona yet can’t think of an applicable dApp. Peersonified dating might not be viable.
Peerfecto, Supeerb or Uncommons employs a new form of hypeermedia which incorporates peeranking.
Note uncommons.com — which was for sale for $19k when I first proposed it 5 months ago — is now taken:
@quillfiller wrote:
Infopedia comes across to me as a little bland, compared to the more characterful Wikipedia
Agreed. Yet with insignificant remorse I surmise that F*ckbook didn’t become nearly as popular as the uninspiringly named Facebook.
More people’s IQ is nearer to 100 than 120+. We shouldn’t weight too significantly the naming feedback of those who aren’t in the intellectual target demographics for the audience/users of a site intensely focused on knowledge development and dispersion.
(interesting what you wrote about the tree structure of microtransactional tipping)
There’s some conceptual errors in my prior description. For blogging and forums comments shouldn’t be charged a fee because they’re superfluous and constitute a mass feedback/participation mechanism. Only voting (decentralized curation and ranking data) should be seriously considered. Votes can curate comments to filter the superfluous. A Wikipedia clone should charge for edits, because the multifurcation needs to be serious and reasonably constrained otherwise the canonicity would be likely diluted beyond deeper knowledge into absurd noise of a zillion variants per cyclopedic term. It’s important to note that Quora is founded on exclusivity and highly selective curation. The peered curation will displace the centralized curation, while hopefully generating comparable quality of signal with more depth (i.e. less one-size-fits-all error in the variance between preferences).
Also c.f. §ChangeTip Died.
A centralized site could also implement analogous peeranking and multifurcation algorithms, but they’d need to open their database so users can permissionlessly innovate independently any ranking algorithm and interaction with the consensus ledger. Doing so would likely forsake their pricing power (e.g. to force ads on users) and still wouldn’t be inviolable permissionlessness (aka trustproof).
Off-topic: I significantly augmented the §World Economy to Decline Until 2036 of my blog Countries Vulnerable to Economic Devastation Soon. Also c.f. an edit to a recent comment post wherein the bond gurus predict 75 basis points interest reduction in 2020 before interest rates start rising again. Expect a dip in risk assets (e.g. Bitcoin) after this recent rise as traders lock-in gains into short-term bonds (bond prices go up when interest rates decline) before trading back to USD/gold/crypto assets in 2020 to escape the short-dollar vortex.
P.S. Regarding the look & feel rebranding of exchange Kraken, I have emailed them warning that Binance is substantively innovating much faster. The diversity of Kraken’s altcoin trading must be increased to rival Binance and they should launch an exchange token analogous to Binance’s BNB.
