Quote from: _tenletters on March 20, 2014, 03:26:17 AM

No. This solves the problem by creating a much worse one.

What is the problem, and who does it affect?

Quote from: _tenletters on March 20, 2014, 03:26:17 AM

You are expecting people to learn a whole new obscure aspect of a system which already functions cryptically by definition.

Milli and micro are hardly obscure; they're built into the core Bitcoin client, billions of people across the globe use them already.

But, the most important thing is - no one's "expected" to learn milli and micro. They can - and do - use whatever they're comfortable with. Plenty of people use "Satoshi" already. Plenty of people use mBTC. Personally, I use BTC because it's usually most convenient. Informal, ad hoc conventions will spring up - but they'll do that organically, with communities deciding informally what works for them. They don't - we don't - need a formal convention being imposed.

Quote from: _tenletters on March 20, 2014, 03:26:17 AM

This essentially requires an entire re-branding.

And who will perform this (presumably non-trivial) task?

Quote from: _tenletters on March 20, 2014, 03:26:17 AM

People have been hearing "bitcoin bitcoin bitcoin" in the media. "Bitcoin" is what they are familiar with, if they decide to participate, it is "bitcoins" they they will want, not some impotent sounding mouthfull of garbage called a Mil-E-Bit-Coin.

I keep hearing about these people who "want" BTC without any reason. I remain unconvinced that they represent anything other than a very small part of the Bitcoin economy, or that they will ever represent a significant part of the economy. I mean, I understand that tourists might buy foreign currency on a whim, but for most people when they buy BTC (or JPY, or LTC, or RMB) they have a reason for it. They either need exactly 7.3 mBTC to buy something worth 7.3 mBTC, or they're investing and have some idea what they're investing in.

Quote from: _tenletters on March 20, 2014, 03:26:17 AM

They very concept of a coin is not consistent with something that costs hundreds or thousands of dollars. People already work their way around this. They talk about protecting or spending their "bitcoins" even when talking about less than 1BTC.

Yup, it's a common idiom. I think about "the pounds in my pocket" even when I'm down to only a few pence (I do the same with "euros", even though "euro" is officially the plural). Incidentally, people do spend hundreds, even thousands, of dollars on coins - they're investing in precious metals and are (hopefully!) aware of the value of the stuff they're investing in.

Quote from: _tenletters on March 20, 2014, 03:26:17 AM

Making this change just requires a modest conscious effort to go in the direction with the least linguistic resistance. A true semantic stock split will catch on and take over on it's own. Just like tipping a boulder off the edge of a steep slope.

That modest conscious effort? Absolutely - and people are already doing it. It's just that they're coming up with their own solutions, solutions that work for them (even though they might seem bizarre to you and me). I'd like to step back and let them get on with it. A decentralised payment system and digital currency is a great idea - why would I want to centralise any aspect of it?