Name Convention Proposal

Jurors
#1

Information for all our Jurors.

There is a growing consensus around a misguided attempt to turn the Token Curated Registry into a Project Curated Registry. The idea is based on usability, on providing the user with the most popular or commonly accepted name, i.e the project name.

The problem with this well-intended proposition is that it nullifies the purpose of a TCR. A TCR is a registry, what are we registering? Tokens, not projects. There may be exceptions where we should not list a token based on the name provided in the smart contract, but to make those exception a general rule nullifies the purpose and use of a TCR.

What happens when a project has multiple tokens? What happens when a project name changes?

The question should be, what is the source of truth for the TCR. Should it be based on a popularity question, or based on information available on the blockchain? Because, in my opinion, if we are doing the former, then let’s call this a Project Curated Registry, or an Oracle, because the source of truth is no longer the blockchain.

I believe the growing consensus is going the opposite way, but I’m writing for the records, so that it can never said that there were no warnings about going the direction of a PCR.

1 Like
#2

To be honest, at first I had the exact same opinion as you currently have. People just like it better to see “Dai” instead of “Dai Stablecoin v1.0”. If it makes it any better I think about what the TCR eventually might be used for. A good example might be integration with Uniswap which is currently being tested: https://kleros.github.io/uniswap-frontend

When I load a Dapp like Uniswap, I’d rather see project names than a list of tokens that consists of deprecated names, names ending with “token”, “coin”, version numbers or token names that are completely different from the project name.

1 Like
#3

Well, I agree that there should be exceptions, my point was that I’m against making the exception the rule. Because once we go that route, then effectively, we’ve created an oracle, where the source of truth is outside the blockchain.

1 Like
#4

I understand your point. Problem with making exceptions is that creating consensus around these is really hard. It’s going to be nearly impossible to have the best of both worlds.
Also I don’t see creating an oracle as a bad thing per se.

#5

A bit late, but I agree with @daochemist .

We could have two names to fix this: Canonical name and display name.

1 Like