StarFuel
Bravo
FanFuel

FanFare (evokes "token")

Fandom

FanBase

Affirmative

Ok, here's a crude attempt at a MUSE logo design:



The triangle shape for the "M" suggests a strong foundation, and the folded strip can represent an evolving, dynamic blockchain. The artwork is clumsy and needs a lot of work, ha ha. But hopefully the basic idea is clear.

Initially I was planning to respond with this in one of the GUI criticism topics, but it grew pretty large, so I decided it deserves a separate forum thread. So in response of my post I would like to see your thoughts on "fundamental issue” I mentioned below as well as your questions about our future plans and your ideas and suggestions. (Please note, that when you say “NXT/Crypti/you-name-it-wallet is better/cleaner” or Poloniex exchange is better - it’s not really helpful). I think most helpful UX feedback comes in the following form: “As <experienced (or not experienced) forex trader> (or <paypal user>, etc) I do <some operation> very frequently so if would be very helpful you put <this data> at <the bottom>; or you put <this button> on <top of the page>; or you remove <something> because it bloats UI”.

I think the most fundamental issue is that half of the community would like to see BitShares GUI as exchange, the other half as cryptocurrency wallet with built-in exchange. And in general - there is no consensus on what BitShares is.

And we are not going to stop here - there are big plans: the help system is under heavy development, just take a look at Membership page to have some idea - we are planning to add detailed help content to almost every page, also there will be "app tour" for new users. React native mobile GUI for iOS and Android should be out in a couple of months, all the backend and keys management are already in place; more gateways support is on the way; most of the blockchain features like proposed transactions; blinded transfers; privatized bit assets - all these are planned to be implemented before the end of year. The architecture we’ve chosen for 2.0 GUI has proven itself to be very effective and we are really getting up to speed (remember on one of the mumble sessions BM said this is the future of web development), and take a look at number of commits to graphene-ui repo - it's close to 2k already - twice as much as toolkit has got being longer under development.

Great. Glad to hear about all of the exciting planned features.

BUT, let's remember that we must walk before we can run. One of the first priorities should be ensuring that users can import their balances safely, easily, and securely. It seems a number of users here have had problems importing their balances from 1.0. There's nothing that erodes a BitShares supporter's confidence more quickly than an hours-long wallet import procedure that leaves them frustrated, wondering what's happening, and worried that they just sent all of their balances to limbo.

Imo, problems with wallet importing, missing balances, etc. are one if the main reasons for big price declines in the past few days. This is nothing new--something very similar happened after the launch of the first wallet last year. Remember that time? Why did the price of btsx crash after the launch of the first wallet?. It wasn't because of the lack of cutting-edge features. It wasn't because of concerns about the back-end. And it wasn't due to disagreement about whether the GUI should be more or less like an exchange. The price crashed mainly because the wallet was prone to crashing, and people were concerned about missing balances (one could argue also that the market peg was unraveling, but that happened a bit later).

Bottom line: the devs' FIRST priority for the GUI should be to make the key/wallet import procedure smooth and seamless. This is a no-brainer. After the import problems are solved, everything else, including the BTS valuation and growth in the user base, should be much easier.
 

MUSE Blockchain Logo Proposal

Cool... especially the hexagon in the background with the hidden "M" as part of the design. The hexagon suggests distributed peer-to-peer--a level and transparent playing field--and the M would be a great way of tying in to MUSE.

What about having just the hexagon, with the "M" outlined in a different color?

Main takeaways:

• It'd be very, very surprising if "Identabit" or "Identibit" could gain any traction at all as a name for currency units.
   
• For the blockchain or a platform, "Identibit" with an "i" might be viable. "Identabit" with an "a" is much less "intellagent" and much weaker. It doesn't meet the bar, imo, for a blockchain/platform name.
   
• For currency units, "ubit" or "ibit" would be fun, easy to use, and easy to popularize among consumers. "IDB" might have a use in connection with currency units, but it's insipid, unmemorable, and not the type of name that young and old alike would really enjoy using.
   
• It's not necessary to have a .com, .net, .org domain name for the currency. A domain name matching the name of the underlying blockchain/platform would be enough.
   

I agree: the "a" in "Identabit" is part of the problem. "Identibit" is a MUCH better name, imo--much clearer, respectable, apropos, and less likely to make people think there was sloppy spelling.

John, out of curiosity, what would be the rationale for going with "Identabit" rather than "Identibit"? Is it because the "a" makes the name slightly closer to "Remitabit"? In my opinion, "Identibit" sounds quite close to "Remitabit" already, and it would fit in well to the naming scheme. Also, the .com, .net, .org are all available...