bad idea. focus on symbol. I disappointed the NGL Markeging team. how may exchanges change the name?
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.
6 Likes
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!
6 Likes
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?
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.
4 Likes
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!
1 Like
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.
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.
4 Likes
OK then we agree each other :-).
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.
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.
6 Likes
変える必要ないやん
1 Like
Nice !
-
XEM(XEM) -
Symbol(XYM)
NEM is an ecosystem that includes Symbol and XEM
I think it’s easy to understand.
4 Likes
I agree that changing things now would just lead to more confusion. I feel like this time and effort could be used to build the Symbol brand. I think everyone was expecting more after the launch and really the only people that know about Symbol right now are members of the NEM community. It’s crazy that the devs hard work over many years developing Symbol seems to have ended in a lacklustre marketing campaign which has no reach outside of the community. We want to attract new people and show off the technology but so far I think that this has failed.
I know it is still early days after launch but seems to me that if we don’t shout about it now then we don’t attract new users/developers and it makes it harder to sell the brand further down the line. I am worried that we will just get lost in the soup of hundreds of other coins that nobody cares about.
2 Likes
I completely agree with your opinion.
It is time to look outward rather than inward. I have a feeling that not many people who have joined the NEM community in the last 1-2 years think so.
Changing the name NEM would be like destroying the brand that we have built up, and I am against it. If the renaming passes in the vote, I will not support NEM/NIS1 at all in the future.
4 Likes
The proposal is not to “change the name NEM” but to give NIS1 better branding.
Did you read my comment above? : NIS1 & NEM Naming Convention - #26 by leoinker
Sometimes I feel like I spend a year thinking, researching, and writing a thesis, then a couple others give 5 minutes of thought and yell loudly “This sucks!”
And since they yelled loud, their position takes prominence.
I’m not even 100% sure on my position, but getting closer. Have to test it against structured arguments & contrary evidence to be sure.
For this discussion to even be beneficial, anyone commenting should state their position, make their arguments, and address opposing arguments.
I’m saddened to see that not many are doing this.
2 Likes
I see your point about NEM/XEM being confusing but if taking your previous example we keep the XEM ticker and rebrand to e.g. “Empire” is that not going to confuse things further? Then you end up with two products that nobody has heard of.
I don’t really agree that there should a rebrand of NIS1 at this point in time. It adds additional confusion at a when things are already unclear to users.
People still know the NEM brand and XEM. The problem to me seems to be the lack of marketing of Symbol. Nobody knows it exists at this point let alone that it is part of the NEM umbrella unless they are already part of this community and are on the forum or following NEM Official on Twitter. This should be our opportunity to make it clear to the world that Symbol is part of NEM and sell the new features and benefits. Put money into that rather than a rebrand of NIS1.
If there has to be any rebrand it seems that the simplest is to just call Symbol eg NEM2 or NEM2 (Symbol). That links it with the NEM brand. People then instinctively know when they see NEM2 on an exchange or in coinmarketcap or on Twitter etc that it is part of the same umbrella. NIS1 keeps the XEM ticker and becomes NEM1 that is already established and loved (see multiple comments above) rather than another random English word that doesn’t really mean anything.
Apologies that this is a 5 minute response and not a thesis. There are many pros and cons to any approach and nothing will be perfect. My opinion is keep things as simple as possible and shout louder about Symbol. We want to expand the community and to attract new blood. Seems things are really quiet post launch…
2 Likes
This is what the branding looks like to many. There is the NEM Ecosystem (NEM Group, NEM Ventures, NEM Software, etc) They think “NEM” is a coin they can buy. It’s even displayed like that on coinmarketcap.
If the “true name” is NIS or NIS1, we should call it that, and it should be referenced as that. - But “NIS” and “NIS1” branding hasn’t caught on outside our little circle. It’s time to choose some branding that is more attractive.
Now, I just made up a name: “Gemesis” as an example to show how easy it is to understand the structure if we had a rebrand for NIS1.
Technically NIS1 isn’t remaining as it is, either. It’s being open sourced, reviewed, refreshed, etc. Why cling to the old name when so many other things about it is changing?
3 Likes
I see some have proposed a structure like this. - Or some variant.
I disagree that since NEM branding is good, we should just call everything NEM.
I think visuals emphasize the importance of differentiation, united under a common umbrella & one community.
3 Likes
I say we don’t need to change our name for rebranding. If you think I’m shouting without understanding anything, you don’t understand my intentions either. You should look at the first post.
I have read your proposal before, but I do not agree with it. I don’t agree with “The Movement” at all. I don’t feel the need to change my family’s name just because people are remodeling their homes.
I believe that no matter how much time someone has spent on a theory, if no one agrees with it in five minutes, it is a theory that needs to be reconsidered. Marketing for public blockchain is not an imposition. It is about reading the intentions of the masses.
We should focus all our efforts on Symbol “now”. This is easy to understand if you look at the history of why Symbol (catapult) was created as a separate chain.
3 Likes