NIS1 & NEM Naming Convention

[issou]

@tresto

The former head of the NEM Foundation held a Twitter poll, and the majority of votes wanted the new chain to have a name that included the word NEM (or catapult). However, only the name Symbol was ultimately proposed. The community had no choice in logo design.

You know this because you’ve been involved in this.

We had no choice but to agree to the idea in exchange for a delayed launch. But then the launch was delayed for another year or more.

The name Symbol makes it hard to tell that it is a blockchain within the NEM brand. This is an unquestionable fact, in my opinion.

ofc, for 99% of people: NEM = XEM. People also often say “I bought NEM coin” instead of “I bought XEM coin”.

It is a disaster of Symbol. Even if NGL make a partnership with Tesla, people will think about XEM. Will buy XEM token and speak about XEM. Cause for them “NEM = XEM”

Even the logo of NEM on twitter is the same as XEM logo.

And people NGL, dont say “we will carefully check that article will say that we made the partnership about the XYM blockchain dont worry”

People dont care, people dont read all the article, people just read “NEM and TESLA parternship” and they think “XEM”.

It is urgent to do something.

[simakki]

It’s a mess and hopefully NEM Group will listing their community.

If Symbol is superior tech then the whole group needs to be rebranded.

@DaveH where’s all the hype for XYM?

For most of the people it does not feel like an upgrade as XYM can’t be found from CMC and NEM is still the 1 priority and brand not Symbol.

We are middle of biggest crypto boom ever and zero gains from either of coins.

[mixmaster]

@leoinker

4. I am not a fan of “NEMclassic” as a name either. It does two things:
   a. Implies something is obsolete, outdated, discarded.
   b. Does not differentiate the product from the movement
5. The argument was made that rebranding NIS1 distracts from progress on Symbol. - I argue to the contrary! Rebranding NIS1 allows Symbol a level playing field in which it can stand out as a top tier product.

For me “classic” doesn’t sound like “obsolete, outdated, discarded”, but of course that is subjective and if many people read it like that, that should be taken seriously.

I agree 100% to what you write in 5. @leoinker. I think long term when it comes to such decisions - and what I see here is there is confusion and that should be resolved. Rebranding creates some work but it’s not like the whole team will have to care only about rebranding for 3 months and is not able to continue to work on all the other stuff that is currently worked on for Symbol.

I personally think we should either have 2 brands without “NEM” in it or 2 with “NEM” in it. That is why I liked the idea of NEMclassic and NEMsymbol. But of course “classic” could be something else like “original” or whatever.

Regarding the logo: It’s tricky. The thing is, so far there was no need to distinguish the Ecosystem from one of the chains (XEM or XYM). But now this changed. So question is: Should we have a new logo for XEM? Or for the Ecosystem? I actually tend to no new logo at all, but just create a mix of both for the Ecosystem (e.g. twitter account). Either really a mix, or use both alongside…

[udo]

Personally, I would like to recommend “ZEM” as a candidate for the new name, based on the pronunciation of XEM.
A new name can also have a positive impact on the market.

[hitoshi]

This is the NIS1 & NEM Naming Convention.
I think that people who have XEM should especially participate in the discussion.
In fact, there are people here who have already sold all their XEM and are only interested in XYM.
It’s natural for them to want us to focus only on XYM.

Especially in the Japanese community, there are a lot of people who only want to see XYM.
Since XYM was established, the number of XEM nodes in Japan has decreased significantly.

If more and more candidates for new names were to come up here
I think a POI poll would be useful to reach out directly to people who have XEM.
However, if there are not enough candidates for a new name, or if there is not enough support for a new name, I don’t think we need to change the current name.

[spizzerb]

hey guys,

wanted to share my view on the topic, also because i was one of the critics about branding i wanted to give you my opinion from the perspective of an admin/mod on NEM telegram channels (english and german)

in the weeks after launch it became clear to me that many, especially newer, members were confused with the 2 chain approach. i think what adds most to the confusion is that our original XEM is still “NEM” in eyes of many and that it is marketed alongside Symbol. Making it hard for someone to understand what Symbol actually is and if its from same team. Since the official twitter, the team and the telegram groups still run under the name “NEM” it doesnt make it easier for someone to understand Symbol is NEM too.

you see, the reason i and others brought this up is Symbol, not NIS. We discussed it because people dont seem to understand the Symbol brand.

i think it would make things easier if we choose fitting names for both chains which shows that both are NEM products.

something like: NEMclassic / NEMoriginal / NEM 1.0 for NIS
and
something like: NEMsymbol / NEM 2.0 for Symbol

these names would show everyone that both chains are indeed NEM but also differentiate between our well established XEM and the new product Symbol (which, with the addition of NEM to the name is visible as NEM product on first sight).

I agree with alot of you guys here that there are more pressing things and no time should be wasted. Priority should be development around Symbol. However, i dont think a rebranding would influence the development on tech side since its done by different people.

maybe it is the best to just stay with the names we have and make sure communication/marketing gets more clear about the 2 chains though

[simakki]

I totally agree with you and that should be easy and fast to implement without major changes.

[garm]

Before continuing this discussion, a few things should be clear.
First, Symbol is not an upgrade from NIS or NIS1. And that’s how it should be marketed - as its own blockchain under the NEM logo.

Second, the community should finally have a clear announcement of how the development of the two chains will continue. No snippets that are published every day will help, sorry. For this, the perception of the blockchain world via Symbol is not strong enough and the time we have is too short.
Unfortunately, news is mainly provided on channels used by the NEM community. That is too little.

If NIS is to have a chance, it must be made clear that with Symbol we have a new independent blockchain under the NEM label and that both are going their own way. Names such as Classic, Original or NEM 1.0 are not appropriate. It should remain with NIS.

In my opinion, one must finally market the label NEM properly. This is the real mistake. This means that in the future, this will be a name for an ecosystem under which more than just two blockchains can be found. There may be other developments released under “NEM” in the future.

The Japanese community is really important for NEM. One of the problems I see is that far too little of the Japanese projects are perceived outside the Japanese community. And if, then again only on channels that are used exclusively by the NEM community and so more or less drown.

[r3n3]

Just to add my opinion.

1. I would have preferred to market Symbol as the NEM 2.0 Catapult upgrade it was planned to be since ehhm… 2016 or 2017 if I recall correctly. And if not migrate all the legacy chain, call it “legacy” just to support previous applications built on it. However, people more clever than me had probably considered the various implications and then taken the other journey we’re finding ourselves on now.
2. I strongly dislike the term “NIS1” and have voiced it out several times already. I guess my concern was heard, evaluated and then dismissed. Out there, not many of any audience (community, blockchain-industry, non-blockchain commercial industry, etc.) would get what that means? It’s an archaic term from the NCC-NIS world pre NanoWallet. When we NEM-OGs used to run Java containers and local NEM Infrastructure Servers on our desktop PCs just to interact with the NEM Blockchain.

In any case, if there was a way out of the “NIS1” mess now, I’d very much like that.

Perhaps do it like Uniswap, Aave and others who need to maintain their older systems running? V1, V2, V3?

• NEM V1
• NEM V2 Codename SYMBOL ?

Happy weekend,
Rene, LuxTag.io

[utsu_jp]

bad idea. focus on symbol. I disappointed the NGL Markeging team. how may exchanges change the name?

[h-gocchi]

NEM is the beginning and generic name of everything. Changing this name is nothing more than changing everything. It leads to the destruction of the NEM brand.
NIS for the first generation of NEM, Symbol for the second generation, that’s enough. Changing the name from now on would be even more confusing.
If anyone is confused by the name right now, it’s because you haven’t been able to clearly convey the brand or name structure. Please get a firm grasp of the root of the problem.

[tresto]

This discussion has made one thing clear to me.

The name “Symbol” was a big mistake.

Let’s vote to change the name “Symbol”
It’s not too late, no one knows ”Symbol” yet!

[udo]

I think it is too late to change the name of SYMBOL.

I’m sure everyone has worked hard to spread the name SYMBOL, but are you going to let it go to waste?

[tresto]

The same can be said for “NEM/NIS1”. What I’m saying is that we should change the name Symbol rather than change the name NEM. The name Symbol is not as widespread as NEM.

The BETTER WAY to do right now is to DO NOTHING ABOUT RENAMING, that’s all.

[hitoshi]

I think it’s necessary to clarify that both blockchains are part of NEM and that NEM is a brand of an ecosystem/movement that includes Symbol and NIS.

As it is, if I were interested in NEM-related news for the first time, I would search for NEM in the upper right search bar on CoinMarketCap and try to buy the XEM that comes up.
Even if it’s news about Symbol, it’s still NEM news!

[janikjan]

I do not agree with change the name of Symbol. Symbol is actually nice name and can be nice brand. We just need to make clear marketing differentiation from old NEM v1. E.g. we should atrract with Symbol new partnerships and investors which love brand Symbol and they even should not know about some NEM v1 brand. From my point of view, NEM marketing team should clearly stated and develope strategy to tell broader audience that Symbol is strong brand and main protocol of our ecosystem. So to sum up, Symbol should build their own strong brand based on new utility and partnerships.

[tresto]

I understand what you are saying. I say it’s better not to change either name. And I don’t see any need to change the name of NEM/NIS1 at all. Please calm down and read my opinions from above.

[janikjan]

OK then we agree each other :-).

[c0nan]

whatever you choose as a name for nis1 please dont call it NEM Classic. Nis1 still has so many potential usecases and the name classic doesnt do it justice. I think shitcoin is a better Name than NEM Classic. we had a marketing firm come up with the name symbol…and it wasnt a bad choice. So maybe we should do it again for nis1.

[udo]

Since the ticker name XEM is already widely known, why don’t we just use the same “XEM” as the ticker name as the official name to reduce confusion?

For example, EOS has the same ticker name and official name.