Why the redacted OP tonyk?

Advantium, because we so want the name to sound like Etherium.

How about the name... Mutiny/Mutinous

Quote from: donkeypong on February 21, 2016, 03:02:02 AM
dexSHARES

:) I am aware of you choice...

I read signatures more than anyone else does (or should do).

dexSHARES

Quote from: CoinHoarder on February 21, 2016, 12:51:34 AM
Your proposal will not work if you fork Bitshares. Take a look at how many alt coins have over 1k USD of volume in a 24 hour period compared to how many alternative coins have less than that. It is likely this fork will fall into the "less than that" category. Thus, Bitshares as-is will have more liquid Smartcoins than your fork. Not to mention all the negatives that come along with forking a project/community.

The free market will decide. That's one of the reasons it has the license it does.

Quote from: BunkerChain Labs on February 21, 2016, 01:19:32 AM
Thanks for clarifying what the d was all about..

I have been talking about this idea with others and off the cuff I came up with a name I thought would be more attractive.

Advantium

Derivative for Advance.. or Advantage.

All together gets away from the 'shares' name to show a real separation and reduce confusion in the market.

Advantium from/for Advance/Advancing or Advantage -  is way cool (although I see my idea as 'back to the basics' more than  any 'real leap forward') which is  somewhat ironic.
But I do like Advantium in golden colours; aka fuzzy style text, if you know What I mean, like




but better.

I think it should be called "Whinges".   :P

Thanks for clarifying what the d was all about..

I have been talking about this idea with others and off the cuff I came up with a name I thought would be more attractive.

Advantium

Derivative for Advance.. or Advantage.

All together gets away from the 'shares' name to show a real separation and reduce confusion in the market.

Quote from: tonyk on February 21, 2016, 12:56:19 AM

Quote from: CoinHoarder on February 21, 2016, 12:51:34 AM
Your proposal will not work if you fork Bitshares. Take a look at how many alt coins have over 1k USD of volume in a 24 hour period compared to how many alternative coins have less than that. It is likely this fork will fall into the "less than that" category. Thus, Bitshares as-is will have more liquid Smartcoins than your fork. Not to mention all the negatives that come along with forking a project/community.

'My fork" as in the fork that I have paid for each single share competing with everybody else?

Thanks for the "I predict...cause I predict" statement. We are all very good at that... when we decide to.

My prediction is based on sound logical reasoning. Your rebuttal is more like "you're wrong just cause you're wrong" temper tantrum style.

Quote from: Pheonike on February 21, 2016, 12:38:50 AM
How about calling it "Slice" instead of dshares.      So instead of shares users own slices of the whole.

Slice is cool,
d in dShares stands for - digital; dex; "da shares" and dan - I will still insist on that, if I have a choice. (As for Dan I still find him genius, even somewhat lost of late)

Your proposal will not work if you fork Bitshares. Take a look at how many alt coins have over 1k USD of volume in a 24 hour period compared to how many alternative coins have less than that. It is likely this fork will fall into the "less than that" category. Thus, Bitshares as-is will have more liquid Smartcoins than your fork. Not to mention all the negatives that come along with forking a project/community.

Quote from: Pheonike on February 21, 2016, 12:38:50 AM
How about calling it "Slice" instead of dshares.      So instead of shares users own slices of the whole.

dTranche
bitTranche

How about calling it "Slice" instead of dshares.      So instead of shares users own slices of the whole.

Per Title