I think you fail to understand who AnonyMint is and the scope of his project will likely crush anything this narrow project Verify will ever achieve. And it has been in research and development for years.

You can do what ever you want, it won’t change the fact that we own the CRED name as both the project name and the token name because our project will have orders-of-magnitude more users and exposure than yours.

I was attempting to make a friendly suggestion that you consider changing your token name to REPS avoid causing confusion at the exchanges. You could end up getting sued later perhaps by our users in a class action lawsuit who are pissed off that your selling them tokens (on exchanges) which are not usable for our project. So it might be best for you to bite-the-bullet and make the change sooner than later (that is if your project is serious about being around a year or two from now, but I doubt that as well).

Your project is supposed to be a serious, objective reputation service for merchants. Reputation is a quality attained by widespread acceptance. So you should be using REPS and not credibility which is more informal, can vary based on localized, subjective persuasion, and associated with street cred where it fits better with our project (e.g. we will have decentralized curation/moderation wherein credibility can vary for different sets of users). Also who knows you may possibly end up doing very well with your project by piggybacking on ours, so why are you trying to make enemies? Even look at the title of this thread says, “Verify - The Future of Reputation” not “Verify - The Future of Credibility”. You can clearly see that the word credibility doesn’t describe your project well. Be consistent and use a token name that matches the words you use to describe your main feature, and stop infringing our project and token name (which are consistent and well matched to our project theme).

You’ve been sent a friendly notice at the earliest time that we became aware of your use of our project and token name.

Btw, are you member of the project team or just some random supporter that we should ignore?


You’re not Ethereum. You’re one of some 100s of ERC-20 token ICO metoocoins with a niche idea and whitepaper, extracting money from speculators for a common enterprise, which makes it a security subject securities regulations.

There’s no way we’re going to let you waste the CRED token name on that, given we owned it before you starting infringing and our plans are vast and have been in place for a long-time. And we’ve already used the CRED token name, you just aren’t aware of it.


The gangster tone is not befitting a professional project.

You’re not Ethereum. You’re one of some 100s of ERC-20 token ICO metoocoins with a niche idea and whitepaper, extracting money from speculators for a common enterprise, which makes it a security subject securities regulations.

There’s no way we’re going to let you waste the CRED token name on that, given we owned it before you starting infringing and our plans are vast and have been in place for a long-time. And we’ve already used the CRED token name, you just aren’t aware of it.

Afaics, you’re infringing on our use of the CRED token name. Our plans/use of this name predates yours as best as I can determine based on the first public post from your project being early October 2017 on Medium, which didn’t even mention CRED. Your whitepaper has a reference to “Oct. 18, 2017” on page 12, so it wasn’t created before that date. Do you have any public evidence of your plans/use of the CRED name from before October? The first public mention of “CRED tokens” that I can find is on your Medium post of Nov. 8 and the OP of this ANN thread which is also dated Nov. 8.

https://www.name.com/whois-lookup/cred.cloud
https://www.namecheap.com/domains/whois/results.aspx?domain=cred.cash
https://imgur.com/a/JvmFI

I think that for a considerable duration of time it won’t really matter. Our projects have different target markets. I don’t expect an issue on the exchanges because of this (I won’t tell you why now and actually you’re use of the CRED name on exchanges is somewhat of a blessing for us). And I doubt very much that your narrow scope, ERC-20, ICO-issued project¹ will be of any serious threat in terms of name confusion to the scope of our goals/plans. But none of us can predict the future.

Yet this serves as notice that we don’t intend to stop our use of the CRED name.

To avoid confusion and dilution of brand (mostly at your detriment, if any, since CRED is the name of our project and domain name), you might want to consider changing your token name to REPS (can’t be REP as is taken by Augur). Since reputation seems to be your project’s primary function.

Other than that, best wishes for you.


¹ _{I have strong doubts about whether ICO-issued projects will survive for more than a year or two due to a sea-change in regulation on the way.}