Quote from: xorpheus on March 01, 2014, 12:50:12 AM

Quote from: shackleford on March 01, 2014, 12:41:02 AM

Quote from: xorpheus on March 01, 2014, 12:21:00 AM

Quote from: shackleford on February 28, 2014, 10:12:54 PM

Quote from: xorpheus on February 28, 2014, 06:46:45 PM

Quote from: ErrorBcc on February 28, 2014, 01:49:54 PM

Quote from: child_harold on February 28, 2014, 12:34:58 PM

DarkCoin is what bitcoin should have been. Some might call it "Bitcoin 2.0" but would do better by saying:
"DarkCoin is digital cash."

+1

But that's why I think its better to call it D-coin or something else (not related to dark)
New people will think that darkcoin is related to illegal things and thats not the intention, idea of it. Maybe it will scare/put off (I don't know the right word) some people...No?

The name itself will be the reason darkcoin is never widely accepted

The name is irrelevant..

That is exactly the point I was trying to make.

blah blah blah

lol nice editing. The name is most definitely not irrelevant. Bitcoin's success is due to the fact that the name does NOT hint at how it may be used.

Not suggesting rebranding at this stage, nor do I have any suggestions for an alternative name. I was simply agreeing with somebody's point of view that the name darkcoin will limit it's use. And it will.

FreeCoin then ? Eg you are free to do whatever you want and hopefully big enough to take responsibility for whatever that causes. I like Dark as a name btw. Bit of grit. But I agree a certain connotation does attach itself. Depends on the market targeted I suppose. For 'dark' stuff BTC is pretty futile (foolish) these days.