"BITUSD"=bitUSD too ambiguous?

[James212]

I've been discussing this issue in this thread...

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=10383.0


The branding of BitUSD is a major issue IMO.  Only the USD pegged asset in Bitshares should be referred to as "BitUSD".  All forks should not use this nomenclature as it will cause major confusion (Peertracks I'm looking at you).

   I agree.  I also think the official spelling should be "bitUSD"  not "BitUSD".    A minor point, but it goes over much clearer marketing wise.  There is much value in getting the small details right.  It adds up.   

[bytemaster]

I agree... BitShares will lay claim to Bit* assets.

Other chains such as NOTE should have NUSD or NoteUSD.

[wasthatawolf]

I've been discussing this issue in this thread...

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=10383.0


The branding of BitUSD is a major issue IMO.  Only the USD pegged asset in Bitshares should be referred to as "BitUSD".  All forks should not use this nomenclature as it will cause major confusion (Peertracks I'm looking at you).

[davidpbrown]

I wonder whether the branding of BitUSD is being stated strongly enough.

bter.com has a market for BTC/BITUSD but it's unclear looking at that whether that is necessarily BitShares BitUSD or some other flavour bitUSD. Given the name is so simple, I wonder that bter and others need to show a BitShares logo or at least some short confirmation text linking that asset to BitShares brand - they have a Bitcoin logo on one side of the equation and not on the other. Does BitShares own that name in some way we can be confident instances of it are the same? Perhaps need to push for BitShares logo to be presented there too?