Best of luck guys ![Hi, apparently this text is editable. :)](http://bitsharestalk.org/Smileys/aaron/smiley.gif)
...the name shouldn't be BitShares PTS. That just brings about the same confusion the merger was set up to eliminate.
Agreed. Hence the following:
* After the upgrade, a complete rebrand.
Cool, the sooner you can drop 'BitShares' the better, from both a BTS & PTS POV imo.
Why? Isnt it powered by bitshares technology?
Why not have every fork called bitshares-fork? So bitshares-sparkles, bitshares-rpdc...etc.
It shows competition inside the same place while also serving to make it easier for outsiders looking in to see all the chains that were sharedropped. In 2 years, if there are 20 bitshares forks all with bitshares somewhere in them with marketcaps in the 10's of millions, i bet there will be even more people wanting to buy pts. Of couse, there needs to be an leasy way to identify these for everyday people. The best way is to keep bitshares in the names of these, not to dissassociate them from one another.
This decision boils down to two ways of thinking:
1) bitshares is a single SuperDAC
2) bitshares is a toolkit and a means of distinguishing yourself from inferior toolkits
Now that i have talked enough with a veteran here, I bought PTS. I like profit, but also think competition between many chains with the bitshares name really helps that.