[jamesrcole]

The terminology is still going to seriously hinder uptake. All of what you said can be true and better terminology would still be better for them.

[iamnothere]

I guess I'm a cynic, but:

> Breaking news. In a series of explosive toots...

> The foreign minister was forced to resign after a number of offensive toots...

> Everyone's talking about what J K Rowling tooted today...

If the age of tweet-reporting ends because of "toots" then I am all for it. As for your other examples, you have a decent point.

> OMG, your toots are so funny!...

> I can't believe you tooted that!...

I can see how this might feel weird for some people, at least in the English-speaking world. But people thought "tweeting" was ridiculous, and they made fun of it relentlessly. In the end it doesn't matter all that much.

[jamesrcole]

> But people thought "tweeting" was ridiculous, and they made fun of it relentlessly.

I don't think the terms "tweeting" and "tooting" are in the same ballpark in terms of how ridiculous they sound to people.

> In the end it doesn't matter all that much.

But naming does matter, which is why companies spend huge sums on it each year.

(Btw I removed those examples from my earlier comment as I felt they weren't relevant to the topic we were originally discussing, which was the name Madstodon)

[prophesi]

Honestly, the name doesn't matter once the network effect kicks in.

[jamesrcole]

But the naming (especially "toot", less so "Mastodon") will likely stop the network effect kicking in IMO. I think it's that bad.

[gsich]

Just your opinion.