# Naming the SourceCred Community

**URL:** <https://discourse.sourcecred.io/t/naming-the-sourcecred-community/259>\
**Category:** The CredSperiment\
**Created:** [October 4, 2019, 5:25pm UTC](https://discourse.sourcecred.io/t/naming-the-sourcecred-community/259 "2019-10-04T17:25:35Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 7

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![decentralion](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex032/user_avatar/discourse.sourcecred.io/decentralion/32/7_2.png) [@decentralion](https://discourse.sourcecred.io/u/decentralion)\
**Post date:** [October 5, 2019, 7:16pm UTC](https://discourse.sourcecred.io/t/naming-the-sourcecred-community/259/7 "2019-10-05T19:16:52Z")

</div>

> [@burrrata](#):
>
> Grain fits very nicely in the context of the metaphor (harvesting/planting), but it’s not as exciting. Also, how would one tie “cred” (abstract concept of reputation) to “grain” (not so abstract concept of stuff that grows out of the ground)?

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.

> [@burrrata](#):
>
> So I’m torn. Explaining cred/grain is 10X more intuitive and instantly makes the concepts stick, but it’s not as fun. Explaining cred/mana sounds super cool and I want to play, but I’m not exactly sure what’s going on (I’ll figure it out as I go).

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.

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.sourcecred.io/t/naming-the-sourcecred-community/259)._