DarthFraktal said: ↑
This is not reason enough to give up the name...
So DarthFraktal do not give up the fight.
A new day is DAWNing.
If "Darkcoin" is such a negative term, as many claim (myself as a no-native speaker can't fully grasp its negativity) why it should be replaced with another non flattery term? Ponder how Tao's dashing to promote DASH everywhere shows "dash" as quite an appropriate term given the meaning of the word:
dash (v.intr.) To move with haste; rush: dashed into the room; dashed down the hall;
dash (v.intr.) To strike violently; smash: waves dashing on the rocks.
dash (v.tr.) To hurl, knock, or thrust with sudden violence: dashed the cup against the wall.
dash (v.tr.) To remove by striking or wiping: dash tears from one's face
, etc., etc., etc.
I still think we can't seriously talk about re-branding or the name if we're not clear what is the "true nature" of Darkcoin. Evan's original White Paper claims: "Darkcoin is the first privacy centric cryptographic currency
based on Satoshi Nakamoto’s Bitcoin," so I wonder is this still the "true nature" of it? If this still stands, we need to consider what to do to further our cryptographic currency's agenda. If not, what is it, our controversial Darkcoin?
Does InstantX represents its core? It is "just" a great feature, revolutionary in the crypto world but it that does not really solves any of the user's burning needs. (PayPal is instantaneous, most credit and debit card are fast enough that using them does not prevent them from wide use as we see daily in every supermarket across America)
Does Darksend represents it? It is a crypto solution that defends our right to privately conduct transactions without prying eyes of all these spying on our every move.
I still strongly believe that the Foundation's overly-lawyerly approach will NOT protect Darkcoin from the future clashes with the sycophant mass media once they start defending their Overlords (the system ruled by the Financial Crime Cartel) from the danger Darkcoin might pose. Talk about adoption problems is a thinly veiled, most likely not intentional, attempt to mask the real issue, would Darkcoin, Bitcoin and alt-currencies in general be allowed to co-exist with the fiat money system at all? Even bitcoin is hardly accepted so why would this be a problem in this phase of Darkcoin's development. Let them come to you approach might work in this case. Why to alienate 1% of 0.1% of the world's population willing to fight for privacy and property rights in a vain hope that compromise will open the doors for 99% which would never be the case. (read Bitcoin: Technical Background and Data Analysis by the Finance and Economics Discussion Series Divisions of Research & Statistics and Monetary Affairs Federal Reserve Board, Washington, D.C. should you wish to know more)
So we need to define our defense first because it is obvious the Foundation wants to act per-emtpively. No saintly name will help us, trust me on this, I know how does it feel to be attacked by the Government. (not this one, granted) If Darkcoin or Saintcoin or Taocoin is a "currency" we might encounter a real problem: "a central bank has a monopoly right to issue of coins and banknotes." Now, if we - as the I.R.S. does - define Darkcoin as PROPERTY, we have a right to our property.
"The Universal Declaration of Human Rights
is a declaration adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 10 December 1948 at the Palais de Chaillot, Paris 
, in its Aritcle 17. Proclaims:
n (1) Everyone has the right to own property
alone as well as in association with others;
n (2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.
I believe that crypto-currencies are properties
, as personal use assets, so transactions so transactions with Darkcoins
or any other crypto-currency is akin to barter arrangements. As such, crypto-currencies also have similar tax purposes. (see The Australian Taxation Office statement
or the IRS Virtual Currency Guidance
stating the “virtual currency is treated as property for U.S. Federal Tax Purposes.” In Germany, the Bitcoin is "private money" which can be used in "multilateral clearing circles", therefore, our right to mine the cryptocurrency , to exchange it for other assets
, including for the fiat money issued by a governmental or quasi-governmental central banks, is our undeniable human right
We need to re-difane our STANCE regarding Darkcoin's core message before embarking on bickering with Tao and his over-zelous promotion of that empty name as it has been proposed.
Further info on “mining” could be found at http://www.coindesk.com/information/how-bitcoin-mining-works/
In 1948 the UHDR has been adopted by 48 countries including Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Greece, India, Iran, Iraq, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, Philippines, Siam (Thailand), Sweden, Syria, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay, Venezuela;