From: "Luke-Jr" <luke@dashjr.org>
To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2013 23:10:32 +0000
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.12.0; KDE/4.10.5; x86_64; ; )
References: <CAKaEYhK4oXH3hB7uS3=AEkA6r0VB5OYyTua+LOP18rq+rYajHg@mail.gmail.com>
	<52854F59.9000500@monetize.io> <5285545C.4030607@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <5285545C.4030607@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
  charset="iso-8859-15"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201311142310.33829.luke@dashjr.org>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] moving the default display to mbtc
Precedence: list

On Thursday, November 14, 2013 10:53:16 PM Alan Reiner wrote:
> I really like the XBT idea.  It makes a lot of sense to match the ISO
> currency symbol (though the ISO guys will have to adjust the way they've
> defined the "XBT").  And I do agree that going right to uBTC and
> skipping mBTC makes sense, too.
> 
> I'd prefer them not be called "micro bitcoins."  I really want to call
> them "microbes" ... but I'm not sure that has the right flavor for money
> transfer :)  "Please give me 872 microbes".  Perhaps we just call them
> "bits."  Or even "micros" or "microbits".  As I write this, I realize
> there's probably 872 threads on the forums about this already...
> 
> But we would want to promote a consistent term, to avoid further
> confusion when people use different names for the new unit.  It's not
> guaranteed to be successful, but if we pick a good name, and build it
> into the interface on the first release pushing the new unit, we have a
> chance to make the transition even easier.

As long as we're using SI units, IMO we should stick to SI. That means "micro-
bitcoins". *Informally/spoken*, an abbreviation like "mibicoins" might make 
sense.

Luke