BrandNameQuestionnaireTalk

don't like any of the names but will be happy with any name that will be chosen. wonder why the list of names above wasn't published and discussed together with other suggestions like the last ones before? don't like too much surveys too, especially if all fields are required. have the feeling i missed a step in the process. did i?

-- FranzJosefGigler - 14 Nov 2008 - 21:46

I know how much work was involved in this process but the more disappointed I'm with the results

Anyway, we will have a new name at the end which is a good thing.

-- CarloSchulz - 14 Nov 2008 - 22:23

The questionnaire made me think of the different contexts the name will be interpreted in: as innovative product, as enterprise product, etc. Just a name does not exist - brand names are loaded (just as names of rockbands). What matters are the associations. After a name has been chosen, we need to concentrate on creating the brand.

-- ArthurClemens - 14 Nov 2008 - 23:03

Some facts I compiled on these names:

name	hits	com	net	org	comments
cocomint	5260	X	X		.com for sale
contutto	176000	X			.com a online shop
coolabora	8	X			.com kind of prototype web site for Spanish notaries
foswiki	1200				Sven told he could donate the domains
lewiki	2630	X			.com do not work
librett	26000	X			.com is some broken site
powerpaper	93100	X	X	X	Trademark seem heavily defended
powowiki	0
youdit	1360	X			.com access refused

• hits: number of google hits
• com, net, org: are the domains already taken?

-- ColasNahaboo - 16 Nov 2008

Hi Michael, hi collaborators,

I want to say thank you to all who have worked hard in the course that led to this final survey. You did a great job. I am happy, although I do not know, what will be the result. That is because, apart from one name, I like 'em all! I could live with virtually everything that is available. And normally I would say, that I am pretty picky in such matters.

Sure, one is better than another. And the longer I filled out the survey the more I liked certain aspects of certain solutions more. But I also realized, that the names work better in different context and worse in others.

That is why I think, we all should be aware, that probably "something else" might be the result. I just want to state, that I am ready to compromise and that I am pretty confident, that we have a team of pros, that do a great job.

There is no way in underestimating the foundations, that Michael's initiative offer for the future of NextWiki.

Long live the spirit, that lives in the quality of these results.

Cheerio!

-- MartinSeibert - 16 Nov 2008 - 15:23

Please all, keep on voting on the names. We already have some interesting trends & comments. Besides reflecting the will of the community, this second survey turns out to be very important to get to know this loosely coupled group of people that call themselves The Next Wiki Community currently.

The only thing I really would like to plea for is:

1. Keep your comments fair.
2. Keep your mind open.
3. Take it from a positive stance.
4. Don't go out and burn names just because you can. EVERY name can be brought down. EVERY!!!
5. Keep voting. We currently have 50 submissions. The first survey had more than twice as much. The more data points we have the more the result will be justified.
6. Whatever the name will be in the end. You will have voted with your feet.

A comment about "why was this list not presented first before entering the voting period?". We did this in a first attempt to come up with a new name quickly. This 100% democratic process ruled out any name presented. No name would ever pass such a filter. Therefore I rebooted this all by means of two consecutive surveys to find out what you really like and to provide the copywriter with any useful feedback.

Deciding on a new name is really an important thing. Too important to let the community discuss forever and finally burn all names in the end. That process is too expensive right now to come to a decision.

Maybe I am repeating myself what I already wrote in short at FindingANewName already to justify the second attempt.

I discussed the candidate names in the current questionnaire with others on a private channel and we agreed that there are enough good names in there to have a high chance to come to a good agreement on the new name by just go for the voting now.

Please also remember that a future discusion phase on other issues will be much more limitted in time before the actual voting period will start. Part of building up the new association will be to regulate discussions&voting in a way the project can come to decisions in a timely manor.

-- MichaelDaum - 16 Nov 2008 - 16:37

The job isn't done yet, so I haven't even started to try and work out the debt we all owe to Michael for taking on this difficult and thankless task. If we all give him the virtual beers he deserves, he will be virtually drunk for the next year.

Any list of names is bound to be hated by someone. As we saw from the previous survey, there are as many opinions as there are people. Personally I can live with any name on the list (though there is one that I really hate) and will try my hardest to make the best of it. It is far more important to me at the moment that we have a name, than it is to have the perfect name.

This is a non-commercial open source project guys. We are not selling a product. We don't have to wash whiter than white. We just need a name.

-- CrawfordCurrie - 17 Nov 2008 - 09:15

I want to second that. Everybody had his say initially. That did not lead anywhere. We decided on the Community Meeting, that Michael, Kenneth and his wife should come up with 8 names at the max. That is what happens. The task is delegated to Michael. He is obliged to give his best to serve us. But it is his task. I fully trust him. There will not be a name for everybody.

We will have a democratic solution, that I will fully support, no matter what it is.

-- MartinSeibert - 17 Nov 2008 - 20:08

I also second this. Sorry Micha if my comment offended you, didn't want to harm anybody. Now I'm really curious about the results. Keep on!

- FranzJosefGigler - 18 Nov 2008

We should throw a virtual party to celebrate the new name!

A big thank you to everyone involved, really.

We have discovered good things and bad things in the process, but I'm sure that we'll push forward to become what we want Foswiki to become. Should we vote now on the proper capitalization? (ducks)

"Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning" - Winston Churchill

-- RafaelAlvarez - 19 Nov 2008 - 03:24

don't duck---is it FOSWIKI, FosWiki, Foswiki, or foswiki? (note that i declare FOSWiki "illegal" as it suffers the same naming/spacing/WikiWord issue as TWiki (and incidentally, of the 2003 O'Wiki fork)). i've seen all four uses to date.

-- WillNorris - 19 Nov 2008 - 06:09

I vote for Foswiki - its a name, (I'd go for all lowercase, but guess who already did that), and BumpyWords are naf

-- SvenDowideit - 19 Nov 2008 - 06:18

I vote for FosWiki so it's a wiki word (which will obviously be required in some cases) and then making "all" else consistent. Also that then lends itself to the FW shorthand.

I also vote for pronouncing it as FOSS WIKI and not FOH SWIKI or FAUX SWIKI.

-- RobManson - 19 Nov 2008

Well done everyone. Onward!

-- JaseWickham - 19 Nov 2008 - 07:26

A name that will be heard of! Let's don't make the same mistakes again and use the new name all over in euphoria where it isn't absolutely necessary. Has there been introduced a new site macro called %BRANDNAME% or something?

-- FranzJosefGigler - 19 Nov 2008 - 20:32

Franz, if you're intent facilitating the next fork
%WIKITOOLNAME% -> Foswiki

-- SeanMorgan - 19 Nov 2008 - 23:58