• Forum has been upgraded, all links, images, etc are as they were. Please see Official Announcements for more information

Darksend Rebranding Discussion

eduffield, while I think you are great "Dark" is something that shouldn't be on the wallet for mktg purposes. That's why I would remove it for sure and also make "Instant" a little easier to understand
 
Greetings,

It seems that the "PrivacyProtect" feature solely renders chosen Dash balances/transactions indiscernible via the Dash Blockchain.

I see it from a slightly different but additional perspective.

The whole of Dash Evolution should benefit from "PrivacyProtect" including any social interactions within the "user" namespace.

"Privately" as a feature name suggests that all within Dash Evolution environment "can" be rendered indiscernible via the Dash Blockchain.

e.g. Chat "Privately", transact "Privately", store (DashDrive) "Privately" etc...


Back in a Dash


TheUltraAliens
 
In most cases shorter is better. So PrivateX and InstantX. But... But people need to memorize and remember what specific function does... So PrivateSend and InstantSend are more clear. What about right to use all mentioned names? Does anyone checked that?
 
crowning said:
That's okay for the documentation, but that can't be put on a checkbox or button of the wallet. For this we need good replacements for Darksend and/or InstantX. IMO InstantX is already quite good, I wouldn't replace it.
Click to expand...

Agree. There needs to be a way to explain the different functions. InstantX has a fee and is faster - you can't just say I sent it the fast way...It makes no sense. We need positive connotation names like InstantSend and PrivateSend until they are not separate functions anymore.

The InstanTX and PrivaTX could work. But the TX has to be creatively put in the logo so it looks like the TX in transaction. If these words are converted to another language, will they end with a T so the TX works? The translation might not work.

InstantSend and PrivateSend are easy to say and spell. At this point - less confusing is way more important than trying to be cute with word blends. If you look at other languages it should be simple to just replace Instant, Private, and Send with another language. Actually for the benefit of using other languages this is a really good option.

PrivacyProtect might be good as a trademark for security. But it is too long for an actual function that you need to describe to others. Protect doesn't really add meaning here. Mining and the blockchain already protect your funds. Bringing it up as an option, just makes it confusing.
 
It seems to me like the name depends upon the feature implementation in the software interface.

If it is a global setting, i.e. a "privacy mode," then PrivacyProtect seems appropriate.

If it is a per-transaction choice of how to send funds, then PrivateSend seems appropriate.
 
eduffield said:
We could even have 2 or 3 separate subnetworks with different protocols.
Click to expand...

You mean something like darksend trasactions would be in a different sidechain or something and recognizable by a merchant who could decide not to accept any premixed coins?
 
Why not add a poll to the thread?

PrivateSend and InstantSend seem like the best choice.
 
jpr said:
You mean something like darksend trasactions would be in a different sidechain or something and recognizable by a merchant who could decide not to accept any premixed coins?
Click to expand...

No I mean, what if we have one implementation of Darksend on Tier 1 and another implementation on Tier 3 using the messaging system? Is the second implementation Lightsend? What do we call that?
 
Evan mentioned his thoughts on the Roundtable show !
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top