I owe an apology for offering a criticism without also offering my own opinion on what a solution would be; that wasn’t fair of me.
Upon reflection of the topic, I’d like to add a term for consideration, “credit”.
0.000001 peercoin = 1 credit
1 000 000 credits = 1 peercoin
Tangentially related, but this conversation has added to my concern about the sustainability of the fixed transaction fee in the long-term. Using any of the terms proposed for one/one-millionth of a peercoin, the cost to send 1kb of data (avg. for a single output transaction, 0.01 PPC), will be 10 000 units.
“What!? It’s going to cost 10 000 credits to send you this transaction?”
[quote=“river333, post:23, topic:2311”]If Bitcoin is using “Bits”, and Litecoin is using “Lites”, then I think it makes sense for Peercoin to use “Peers”.
Is there a reason others don’t like Peers? I see I am the only one who voted for it in the poll.
Edit: So for example:
0.0001 is one Peer
0.000001 is one Peercent (or Sunny informally).[/quote]
The peercent sounds a bit confusing to me. Can easily be confused with a Peercoin cent which would be 0.01 PPC
I voted for the Peerbits, but Peers would also fit me, just not sure about Peercents.
At the moment the votes go to the Sunny (and 1000 Sunnys into a King, 1000 Kings into a Peercoin as MoD proposes). I guess we will see whether that will stick going forward. At least we can make clear to Gocoin that we have a view on this topic.
