I think this is actually a good association. Cred is abstract and ethereal; note that cred can change retroactively. Grain is more tangible and familiar: it’s a digital currency, a quantity that never disappears or changes unexpectedly. The grain minting process gives you a durable token of appreciation based on your cred, so there is a “less abstract → more tangible” transformation there.
It’s more important that the name be clear than fun. The fun that comes from a clever name is superficial and fleeting. The fun that comes from the system being well-designed, engaging, and rewarding is what we are aiming for. Having clear names will help us build and communicate that system.
Executive decision: The digital currency that we’re issuing based on Cred is called Grain. SourceCred-generated reputation scores in general are called ‘cred’; cred in SourceCred itself is called Cred (capital-C). The fungible token in SourceCred-systems in general are called grain; grain in SourceCred itself is called Grain (capital-G).
I’m making this a decision so that we can communicate consistently; however it’s not irreversible. If you think this is a mistake or see opportunities for improvement, feel free to suggest them. And thank you @burrrata for the suggestions and clarifying questions and comments which informed this decision.