It's maybe something that doesn't make sense until some adoption has occurred, but a crowdfunding website with NEM would be really great. Something like this: http://vertcoinmarket.com/blog/.

(Our own forum would be a good place to discuss such things...)

On http://www.ournem.com/ it says "We could make trade and finance fairer when we use a decentralized currency and reduce the influence of the established capital." Shouldn't that be "... if we used a decentralized currency ..."?

Yes these things are important but I feel the initial distribution is still somewhat of an issue. It's what should distinguish us from NXT, an IPO with legitimacy. And I don't think 3000 share holders are really enough for that. I understand that more might not be manageable but there are also other ways of distributing coins other than giving them to the shareholders. I think Freicoin had some good ideas here. They have this program where you can donate coins to some non-profit organizations and they add extra coins to your donation from a fund (see here https://foundation.freicoin.org/#/donations). We could get some very good publicity if NEM had something similar.

I also support Naka. And I agree that it should not be the name for the smallest subunit but rather the everyday unit.

So let's say if 1% of the world population uses NEM, there should be on average around 100,000 Naka for each person. (Maybe someone can think of a better metric?)

Now, if there are 4 billion coins and 1 NEM = 1000 Naka, there are 57,000 Naka for everyone in the 1%. So I think this works.

The position of the decimal point is of course completely arbitrary. One way to counter this issue is to introduce subdivisions (as is currently being discussed here). So, 103.01933485 NEM -> 103019334.85 µNEM (with mabye a nice name for µNEM).

The other way to get rid of too many decimal places is to issue more coins and thus avoiding the need of divisibility.

(The core issue here is that the value of NEM will most likely vary extremely between the initial distribution and later times. DOGE, for example, took the approach of simply producing an extremely huge amount of coins. There are currently 50,000,000,000 DOGE and only 12,000,000 BTC. However, all those Dogecoin are only worth $62,000,000 whereas all Bitcoins are worth $8,000,000,000. So as 1 DOGE is only worth $0.0013, you won't have to deal so much with decimal places there because 1 DOGE already represents a sufficiently small amount of value.)

In case I'm not the only one who wondered how the logo would look like if the size and position of the lines more closely resembled the actual letters, here it is:
http://i.imgur.com/qHcnSN2.png

Here is how Bitcoin could be taxed:

The tax office gives a sheet of paper to every merchant that uses Bitcoin and asks them to write down the amount of Bitcoins they received. Then the tax office decides how much taxes they should pay and asks them to transfer the appropriate amount to the Bitcoin address of the tax office.

Interested!

0.04 btc transferred: https://blockchain.info/tx/96b880c5556e91f2671a782cc3bd1d81e6f0359c5b46c88b65a52433c532d8b3