To me though “vault” does not express the main use of SAFE - as a new way for the web and the internet. I feel that storage will be seen as secondary for most since uploading a video to youtube is not seen as storage but as using the web.
6 Likes
Point well taken, and agreed. Vault doesn’t speak to aspects of connectivity and communication. It also runs the risk of pigeonholing SAFE into its data storage use case…
1 Like
bit of a joke I guess … but “THE HOLE” is quite memorable! HOLE-coin! probably someone already has it and I’m sure peeps around here will hate it.
The general idea though is a name that really sticks in your mind - that’s good marketing.
I think Ethereum did branding really well. The SAFE Network sounds good, but perhaps we should think about transitioning that to SafeN or SAFEN. More crisp and has the dual meaning of “to make safe” and is still an abbreviation for SAFE Network. It could be more of a dual branding or transitional change as opposed to a total do-over.
For the currency I think we should avoid anything “coin”. When I read it above I just like the sound and feel of “ayr” for the currency. Ticker symbol AYR. SafeN or the SAFE Network is powered by ayr.
I realize that this does introduce the concern that the name of the project does not directly match the name of the currency like SafeCoin does, but this is true of most/all government-issued currencies. People handle Ethereum and ether just fine even though neither of those really mean anything as names. I think we need something short that rolls of the tongue and has a positive vibe to it. I also liked the suggestion above that several of these ideas be tested out in a focus group or equivalent. Most people won’t care about hidden meanings or acronyms of technical terms.
Just some thoughts…
2 Likes
My thought is that if we go away from SAFE then go away from safe altogether.
4 Likes
I also think Ethereum did branding really well. One of the strengths is the consistency in the naming. The platform, currency, and supporting alliance all bear the same name, which helps to minimize confusion while imbuing the core brand with momentous strength.
5 Likes
I like the Safen idea as it harkens to “haven”.
Another potential name alternative that could work would be one that harkens to “memory / mind / remembering / brain”, maybe a Latin or some other good sounding spelling of them. This because at the end of the day, from a human perspective, safe would serve the same purpose as our mind but with greater scale. The data in my mind I take everywhere with me and no one can hack it from there without my knowledge. A close enough approximation of that biological security but with far greater persistence would be possible with safe.
2 Likes
I disagree. A newb is presented with “Ethereum”, “Ether”, and “Gas” jargon all mixed about in a manner that requires a written primer to figure out what the heck is going on.
Very surprised to read this from you neo. I view SAFE NETWORK as good branding. Although I’ve seen a bunch of different preferred wordings/spellings here on the forum that IMO we should filter down to one.
SAFE
Safe
The SAFE Network
The Safe Network
SAFENetwork
SAFE NETWORK
SAFE.NETWORK
The safenetwork.tech website uses “SAFE NETWORK” all caps. It looks good and works well visually.
The challenge is seeing SAFE NETWORK become a generic colloquial coin of phrase like the often used, “I saw it on the web”. What are the chances that the phrase “I saw it on the safe network” becomes just as generic and common place? Hard to say. Maybe we should instead hope for a situation where the internet is the name people call SAFE in the future?
IMO, this is the reason why we should not be fretting over trademarks. If Safe is truly successful it needs to be or will become a generic household name. Bitcoin has started to achieve this status in recent years.
Did say SAFE Network was bad? Noticed the “If”?
I saw the “if”. I’m just surprised you would even entertain the if/thought rather than obliterate the proposal with flames and fury. Suspicious. Who are you and what have you done with Rob? 
If you read other topics on changing the name I was up top asking. Asking is not an issue because surprising answers may crop up
3 Likes
Well, I didn’t need a written primer to figure it out, but to each their own, I guess. For the most part no one really references Ether, and to me it seemed pretty clear that gas is what makes it go (just like fuel). I’m not saying Ethereum’s approach is perfect, but that it has been more successful than many and offers lessons to be learned both in terms of what worked well and things the market chose to “auto-correct.”
I too, as noted above, am generally opposed to a rebrand, but understand why one might be needed to overcome IP issues. If one most happen, it provides an opportunity to tighten up a few things.
2 Likes
True. For example, I am often surprised to see people confused by the relationship between MaidSafe and SAFE Network. There are plenty of examples where you have an open source project/product that has a corporate entity/leader as the primary developer. Consider Ubuntu and Canonical, Altair and PBSPro, Oracle and VirtualBox, Redhat and CentOS… etc. Why this is so confusing to the cryptonaughts is beyond me… maybe the MAID ticker symbol?
EDIT: This is the other thread where we also recently discussed this topic - (Re)/(more)branding - should we do the unthinkable?
The take away from that thread was that the simplest thing to do to eliminate IP issues was to change from safecoin to just safe or safes. Seems like the best option currently, especially when considering the fact that we have often intuitively shortened safecoin denominations to a quantity of safe in conversations here on the forum.
1 Like
I think it might be due to the (perceived) absence of a live product (portfolio). For example, I think it’s easy for people to distinguish Google from its host of products like Android or Chrome because those products are in market. I had made my peace that once the SAFE Network had launched people would similarly come to more easily distinguish MaidSafe from the SAFE Network while Safecoin would retire MAID.
1 Like
K.I.S.S.
safe, SAFE,
The word must be written out entirely.
(Think of reading software for e.g. the blind)
SAFE network
safe(://) protocol
safe$ currency
Easier and more meaningful than that,
if we are going to re-brand entirely, we
would need to come up with something
better; and ayr, ayres or ayros aren’t a fit.
3 Likes
I like this one too … although I’m favoring “Snet” at the moment – it sticks in my mind better.
I bought 20 snets to use on Snet.
I have 30 safens to use on Safen.
Both sound alright though.
1 Like
Yes that is one I thought had a lot of potential and keeping “The Safe Network” as the name for the network makes sense using snet for the coin name
1 Like
Honestly i think that all the terms used for describing the network and its elements are perfect. I like that they aim to point to the “security” quality of the network which is the big deal here (“SafeNetwork”, “Safecoin”, “Vault”)
The time that I discovered the SafeNetwork I was quite excited for both its functionality and its name. The SafeNetwork term indeed gives (without you even checking it deeper) you a quick hint on what the network is mainly built for. This is good especially for newbies
Example: make a comparison with Ethereum. Try to tell the average user about Ethereum and probably he won’t have a clue about what this term means and why it’s related to the project
And “safecoin”? That’s good for it’s purpose of describing in monetary terms the reward for making your pc resources available to the network.
Example: make a comparison with Ethereum and gas.
“Gas? What the hell is gas and what’s the difference with ethereum?” If I got 1 safecoin everytime I heard people making this question I would now be rich ahah
For these reasons I think that the rebranding is not necessary and plus it would be both dangerous and expensive. This is my personal opinion
7 Likes
if just picking a name to replace the already trademarked safecoin (by another individual), then I don’t get how this is dangerous or expensive … as the safe network coin doesn’t even exist yet on the markets, so not much additional expense has to be taken as it’s only a the pre-existing marketing materials which are trivial in amount compared to post-launch.
And what about the danger of people confusing the two “safecoins”? That will certainly cause a lot of bad-press if someone buys a ton of the wrong coin and gets scammed - then some people (probably who are shorting our coin) will go around saying safecoin is a scam - that’s a REAL danger and we don’t have any solid reason that I can see to take that sort of risk.
2 Likes
It’s not just about picking a name. It’s more than that. Choosing strategic terms for the components of the project is an expensive task that requires energy and time. And it has a deep influence on the future of the project since it creates a new face/image towards several users. Thus, I think your decision on a possible rebranding shouldn’t be taken lightly. As said, I like these terms.
Mmmh yeah I agree with this point. I like the safecoin term and I think it’s probably the best. But IF we lose our fight for its registration maybe we could start to think at an alternative. But i’d like the possible substitute to have “safe” inside
3 Likes