Names for concepts

[xaur]

Below are concepts whose names were discussed. I believe most are settled now, this issue is to make a record of that.

Concepts are numbered, name candidates are bullets below them.

• (1) person who holds DCR but does nothing with it
  • holder
  • investor
• (2) person who buys tickets only for profit, he always votes 'yes' for blocks and 'abstain' for consensus changes and doesn't care
  • passive voter
• (3) the process for (2)
  • passive voting
• (4) person who buys tickets, cares to react on miner misbehavior and actively votes for consensus changes
  • voter
• (5) voting for blocks
  • block voting
• (6) voting for consensus changes
  • consensus voting
  • consensus rule voting (used here)
  • agenda voting
• (7) person voting for Politeia proposals
  • Politeia voter
  • proposal voter
• (8) the process for (7)
  • Politeia voting
  • proposal voting
• (9) "vote to disapprove the regular transactions of block N-1"
  • disapprove block
• (10) block that did no pass vote in (9)
  • disapproved block
  • stripped block
  • punished block
• (11) a kind of SPV that is specifically based on client-side filters; must distinguish from a) 'light' wallets here that rely on 3rd party service, b) most widespread SPV based on bloom filters (Electrum); ideally the term conveys increased privacy
• (12) Decred's hybrid PoW+PoS consensus algorithm
  • see #54
• (13) the decision to forgo liquidity on exchange for the right to participate in governance
  • "skin in the game" is not precise enough - can mean just holding of the asset
• (14) smaller units like 1e-6 DCR, 1e-8 DCR, etc
  • see #129

Settled names

• Proof of Stake voting
  • chosen over 'Proof of Stake mining' in the language proposal
• voting service provider (VSP)
  • chosen over 'stakepool' in the language proposal
• Treasury or Decred Treasury (capitalized)
  • gained more support than 'project subsidy', 'network fund' and 'project fund' in several chat discussions

Discussions

• 2019-03-20: "skin in the game" is hackneyed and vague, people have it in all crypto projects. The decision to forgo liquidity on exchange for the right to participate in governance warrants a term that is more meaningful and reflective of the difference between Decred and other projects; name for staking holder; people aren't going to understand a new concept until you explain it to them regardless of what you call it

[xaur]

Comment re (13) and "skin in the game":

I am cautious about getting too far out ahead of the market in terms of creating brand new terms.
"Skin in the game" imho, is gaining mainstream traction as a term. If that’s the case (and I could be wrong), it's worth riding that wave for a bit instead of inventing a new term and trying to own the market position for it at the same time.
If Decred is the "skin in the game" destination for ppl yearning to participate in that type of community, it will see significantly more growth than if it's the leader in a term that no one else is googling.