LOL, yes, we need to lay this to rest.  Now that I think about it, I like the #2 logo.  It gives the feel of technology so strongly, you can't think of it as something nefarious.  It's very good.

And Darkcoin is a good name, it plays against Litecoin and reflects the inability to see, as in your personal, private transactions.  That's what it was always supposed to be about, that's what we should stress.  It shouldn't kill the coin because some people don't like the name, they'll love the product!  

And there is an element to trust here.  Anyone can clone a coin, but those cloners usually disappear, we have a dedicated development team that's proven themselves.  They've garnered our trust as a community, and we know they'll lead the way through any bumps in the road, pretty much without fear!  Whereas I see bitcoin dragged down by fear because they lost their leader in Satoshi Nakamoto.  We know who Evan is, and we'll not let him go, LOL.

I really should have been a cheerleader in high school!  Too bad I was so ugly, RoFLMAO     

How does darksend compare to fedoracoin or anoncoin anyway?

Apple died until is launched a new mac with round edges and see through plastic painted a shade of pastel crap.  It was no more technically advanced. People were simply paying for brand coolness.  Apple also made the iPhone off the back of white headphones that gave people a way to link themselves to cool brand identity when they purchased an iPod.

Apple is all about making products look good and giving users a way to associate with that cool by just buying their stuff. It did use to have innovation inside too, but it really took existing ideas and made them look better and gave them better form factor.

There is no reason for a polo shirt to cost over $100 when its cost of production is less than $3. People spend the extra $93 on a logo that gives them a brand association.

Branding is everything and nothing. Get it right and you end up with everything, get it wrong and you end up with nothing.

There is no reason for Litecoin to exist. It does so because it calls itself silver to bitcoin's gold.

I'm not staked on the idea of darkcoin branding. It is important, but Darksend is the term that everyone will be using. That needs to be right.

A second coin? Who knows. But why not make it extra hard for a clone to set-up by beating them to the punch? We can have our own bitcoin litecoin thing going on. That would make cheap headlines and extra column inches. It would need to be handled correctly to avoid diluting the existing message. But an alt-coin with a stock split kind of thing to deter potential clones? Hmm.

EDIT : Fcuk it....we can airdrop a 50% premine to existing darkcoin holders after 6 months of darksend launch and and push up the price of darkcoin in the meantime

If Evan created a second coin, Darkcoin would lose its credibility right away. It would make Evan appear as a altcoin P&D creator and nothing more. Not to mention if it used the same damn specs, half the market cap would be destroyed. Terrible idea. The trolls have shown up. Darkcoin as a name and brand are gaining credibility and really starting to scare some people too. (Look at the last posts in the anoncoin thread. Seriously.)

There are now many services and references on the internet that point to Darkcoin (name wise) as well. Changing it would be a disaster. It would cause most people to loose faith in the community and also confuse new investors by not knowing if the project was changed, abandoned, or replaced.

Currently as it stands, I personally believe that the name should stay as Darkcoin and no spinoff coin should be made by Evan.

This is why I posted a few pages ago when there was actually a troll trying to piggyback on AnonyMint's valid feedbacks. He had some bad beef with members very early in this coin's lifecycle I'm guessing, but AnonyMint is legit. Click on his profile and check his posts in Economics subforums. You will not be disappointed.

Because want a coin that serves truly provides decentralized anonymity

I don't give a fuck what the coin is called. It is what it is.

Your example about Apple points out one valid thing, brands can evolve. DarkCoin isn't even a brand, it's an unproven technology still at this point. I believe it will work as outlined by Evan, but that alone won't put it over the top. It won't be the fucking logo either.

The point here is, take a moment and google Zercoin. Look at the media they've gotten. Look at the keywords you see when you read the articles. Now a month or more ago, people donated to a "marketing" fund and there should be expectations of something happening other than your typical crapcoin "bounties". All supporters of the coin should ask, has anything really been done? Those guys have gotten attention either speaking to the media

There were discussions of some very essential and basic steps that could be taken to get the coin elevated to start to be noticed outside the world of BitCoinTalk. These means media outreach, speaking at crypto events, etc.

I see no new articles, no upcoming appearances or much in the way of discussions outside of this naming and branding stuff that is nothing more than going after the lowest hanging fruit. By this point, to be honest, there should be at least a handful of articles about DarkCoin on the front page.

Whatever, aside from Evan and Anonymint, reading this thread makes me want to sell.

Fascinating read. +1 on implementing this for Darkcoin version 2.

See what happens when Evan takes a day off?  Boy are we gonna get it when he comes home!

LOL

I'm sure there won't be any name change nor another coin.  We do have to settle on a logo and brainstorm a marketing plan.  We have a lot of good choices to choose from, and I know there are awesome people here with great ideas, so lets stop hitting this nail on the head, we're denting the wood fibers and ruining the finish, eh?