Bitcoin Cash Should Change its Name to Bitcash

The whole reason Bitcoin Cash exists is because a significant portion of Bitcoin enthusiasts felt that Bitcoin needed saving from those who wanted to steer it in a direction away from its original vision. It was, in a sense, an attempt at preservation.

From that point of view, it made sense to keep "Bitcoin" in the name. The preservationists wanted to establish themselves as being inheritors of everything good about Bitcoin at the very least. At best, they hoped to one day reclaim the "Bitcoin" name, which seemed potentially easier if the word "Bitcoin" was always there to remind everyone of the heritage.

This was a controversial decision, especially in the eyes of those who retained the name "Bitcoin" for their version of the coin. Even though cryptocurrency is, at its heart, just a form of software that can be copied, branched, and adjusted without any particular regard for what is "original," the market at large had clearly decided that there was a single "real" Bitcoin, and any other version was some kind of lesser attempt to try and leach of the glory of the "real thing."

But talk to any Bitcoin Cash enthusiast, online or off, and they will tell you at length about how Bitcoin Cash is, in fact, the real Bitcoin. It adheres more to the vision of the original Bitcoin. The people who took over Bitcoin lied and broke promises in order to distort what the Bitcoin project became. The word "cash" is right there in the title of Satoshi Nakamoto's white paper.

But does any of this matter? Does it help Bitcoin Cash gain any acceptance?

Earlier today, I was using Wise, a service for currency exchange and international bank transfers. They used to be called TreansferWise. Do I care that they changed the name? Not really. Do I even know why? Do I need to know? Somewhere in the world, might there be people who have intense opinions about the original name and the new name, with all sorts of arguments for and against? I can't even imagine caring enough to find out.

Brands change all the time, and I can't make any claim that it's always a good thing, but it certainly doesn't seem to be any impediment to success. What matters most is people's perception of utility.

And that the brand identity doesn't confuse anything. You might have a hard time selling a brand of protein bar if they were called "Automotive Supply Bars." That kind of mixing of concepts would just be weird and confusing.

Unfortunately, six or so years after the creation of Bitcoin Cash, all the "Bitcoin" part of the name is doing is confusing people. The people who already know what Bitcoin Cash is about have already picked their sides in any debates. But they don't matter. They're not a significant part of the marketplace.

The vast, vast, unimaginably vast amount of people who have never heard it will find themselves confronted with tedious explanations of why the word "Bitcoin" is there should they every encounter it. I can say this with some confidence, having personally introduced Bitcoin Cash to more than a few people.

And they don't care about the ideology that put it there, and neither should you.

What does this ideological insistence on holding onto the Bitcoin name do beyond sounding like someone embittered by contentious divorce? Does it foster the likelihood of adoption? Does it actually demonstrate any "legitimacy," whatever that even is?

If your goal with Bitcoin Cash is that it stand as a monument to how Bitcoin has been perverted by people you don't agree with, then I suppose no appeal to change the name will ever sound good to you. But if you want Bitcoin Cash to be the thing that it was always intended to be, a currency and a cash, then embedding niche factional arguments into the name is a hindrance.

The fact that Bitcoin Cash is the rightful continuance of the original vision, if that's what you believe, will never be a fact lost to time. Historical record is what it is, and it sits there for anyone to reference, should they care, which they almost certainly won't. Just like no one knows Nike was called Blue Ribbon Sports for the first few years of its existence.

That it follows Nakamoto's white paper more than any other cryptocurrency is a good thing in my opinion, though we should never treat the white paper as a holy document. But it's not the case that being associated with that white paper is an important selling point. Ethereum has shown that people will flock to new coins if they're given a reason.

And there's constantly diminishing value in the name "Bitcoin" anyway. The concept of a "coin" becomes less and less meaningful as people are using little discs of metal far less frequently as time goes on.

"Bitcash" is my choice for a better name. It makes sense with the BCH ticker designation, "cash" is referenced in the title of the white paper, it's easier to say, and it's representative of the goals.

I could be talked into another name, but no matter what, "Bitcoin Cash" is not helping.