On Thu, Jan 19, 2023, at 00:13, Ian Clarke wrote: > On Wed, Jan 18, 2023, 4:47 PM David Dernoncourt <m...@daviddernoncourt.com> > wrote: >> On Wed, Jan 18, 2023, at 19:32, Ian Clarke wrote: >> > That's not what's happening. The name always belonged to the *mission*, >> > not to any particular piece of software. This is why we were careful >> > not to tie it to any particular codebase when we wrote it: >> >> Maybe that's how you intended it originally, but with the possible >> exceptions of the devs who work on the depot named "fred" and maybe some >> users who are really experts and die-hard on wording accuracy, what most >> users call "Freenet" is that piece of software that you download from on >> this page https://freenetproject.org/pages/download.html that begins with >> "Download and install Freenet:" > > Firstly, you have no idea how most users of Fred feel about this > change, so I hope you're not implying that they all agree with you. > There is a lot of "argumentum ad populum" going on in this thread. > People should speak for themselves.
Where did I mention agreement to the change in what you quote? All I'm saying is that the name "Freenet" is currently attached, in most people's minds, to the particular software and not to "the mission". And before you go back with a "you can't know what people think" argument: why the Hell would you assume a random user who downloads the only software offered on a page subtitled "download Freenet" (and named "FreenetInstaller.exe") would think "Freenet" isn't the name of the software they download and install? Until otherwise proven, they downloaded and ran a software, not a mission statement. > But more importantly, let's pretend that every single Fred user > disagreed with changing "Freenet" to "Freenet Classic". As I've already > stated - the constituency I'm concerned with is the next generation. I don't see how the naming in itself will be a game changer "for the next generation". "The next generation" will adopt any product it deems as "cool", even if it has a stupid name such as "TikTok" or "FTX". So as far as they're concerned, the name doesn't even matter. So yeah, you could rename as you say. You could also rename Locutus as Dicky-Doo-Dah. That's not really where the problem lies. Just like Freenet (current) didn't fail because of its name, Freenet (new) won't succeed thanks to of its name. However, what about the current generation? Is it gently (or not so gently) being told to sod off? I'd like to know, cause stopping a few servers here and there would mean fewer bills to pay. > So if you've got a compelling factual argument for why you think not > doing this will be better for the next generation, then I'm all ears. As I said, for "the next generation", naming isn't important. You could even try naming Locutus "Big Brother", apparently people like that, and younger generations in particular. And considering your naming theory, maybe it's just because the name is catchy.
