I have provided ideas to help re-brand if necessary … but I have also, and still do, really question the need to re-brand.

I agree with the points made by catchingknives, TheFalseProfit and Wachi … is it really necessary … and is "E"igma the right way to go.

Like the old saying … “if it’s not broke don’t fix it” … Zcoin is a really good project … don’t mess it up.

Is the team just trying to distance themselves from past issues … or the perceived conflict with Zcash? … or is there a real reason we don’t know about that the name needs to change.

While it’s nice that you have a potential new logo (the Sigma sign, and it would be a nice transition from the Zcoin Z, I do question using it to pick the name especially starting with an E …

just because you have the Sigma doesn’t mean you need to use it … at least not as part of the name anyway.

Picking a name can make or break a company (or coin in this case).

I think the name should be chosen based on what the coin is going to mean to people that are going to use it … and until you get a clear picture of how Zcoin is going to really fit into the real world, I don’t think a name change is a good idea.

Just my personal opinion …

Gee … what about Zcoin … … …

Since I’m new here I’m not allowed to add another reply … so I need to edit this one and add some notes to respond to the following 3 responses … (I love this forum … ya right) …

More comments:

The Z can still stand for Zero-knowledge … a fundamental design integrated into Zcoin …

That’s why the name really doesn’t need to change from Zcoin …

since both Sigma and Lelantus continue to use Zero-Knowledge proofs in their design … that’s the nice thing.

I agree … spend the resources on making Zcoin even better … and give it some real world functionality …

something people can get excited about … then change the name if it makes sense …

Gee … what about Zcoin … … …