I startəd thinking wə probably don’t want to put the rəvərsə ∃ in thə dApps naməs. Only for thə blockchain and tokən namə. Ovərusə dilutəs thə əffəct.

When I said previously,

I would still like to see ∃ remain as the token/ledger name, but Streem (spelled with at least one ∃?) as a candidate for the dApps name.

I was under the impression that it would only be the third use of ∃ (in addition to the ledger and token names), and that in the case of, say, Streems it would be the dApp portal name, and that I didn't anticipate ∃ being used for every dApp within, as I agree that would be overuse. So in that limited use I was thinking of representing continuity in the branding. I understood with previous suggestion Realms that it would be the portal to many dApps. So, is the one name for a dApps portal abandoned as being too unrealistic to reflect all important features, and instead finding names for the two (?) groups of dApps? If that's the case,

Uncommons is very professional and eclectic (for users who are more likely to understand the distinction between the Tragedy-of-the-Commons and the Inverse Commons). [...] after months of trying to think of something better, it’s still by far the most brandable and apropos name for the knowledge based dApps such as decentralized curation (aka peeranking) with hypeermedia clones of Wikipedia, Quora Q&A, Medium blogging, and Reddit discussion forums.

[...]

I want a naming concept that is ours. That we invented which is rather unique. For the knowledge formation dApps, then Uncommons seems to be our unique concept. In my opinion, even the current “squatter” on uncommons.com is a waste of the wider potential of the plural form of the name.

...then, yes, I'd agree for the "serious" cornucopia dApps. So the challenge still remains for the more popular appeal dApps, where perhaps Realms would still be in the running for the the less serious, variety and entertainment-based group containing the YouTube clone, streaming and gaming apps?

Another dApp name idea to add to the pot: Tribyoots (based of course on Tributes, though I preferred the alternative spelling, which looks fresh and distinctive, plus avoids mispronunciation), which is unique and implies "tribe" and slightly more obscurely, "youth", and more directly an act, statement, or gift that is intended to show gratitude, respect, or admiration. The .com is available for less than $10 on name.com.

I thought of Treet and Tiptree but tiptree.com is in use. Treet (sounds like ‘tweet’ and) is interesting but what USP does it convey? No association to a new paradigm of pyramidal tip tokenization.

Okay, I concede that Treet(s) doesn't convey the preferred USP (perhaps more of a nod with Tribyoots), but there are also other suggestions that for me seem a bit of a stretch, such as with Streems, Peer (if I'm honest, I'd have to say I find those stretched names such as Peerallels a bit too contrived) or Realms. It seems a very tall order to find a memorable and succinct name that encapsulates the range of concepts and call-to-action you wish to reflect.

I returned to the keyword ‘peer’ as the concept that conveys our intended decentralized like-minded coteries better than ‘hive’. For example, ‘hivemind’ means the entire colony acts unified (which is antithetical to decentralization). Whereas, ‘peers’ act independently and relate to each other directly

Yes. While I do quite like Peer, and it does work better than the hive-related names, I don't find it particularly diverting or special. Out of the bunch, Peerank appeals to me most.

Peerank succinctly describes but pigeonholes to a major USP (my name idea from 2015). Doesn’t convey anything about content, debate nor discussion.

True.

Tangentially Note: It’s been an arduous process for me. I haven’t always (or even often) been able maintain continuity of focus and thoughts while battling my gut health. It’s exasperating to conclude by the end of this message that my best name idea for the knowledge formation dApps originated 5 months ago. My energy level was well charged and healthy today while writing these messages today.

I appreciate that fact, and for your subsequent reevaluation of the tree structure notion - reconsidering it myself too, I can see that a tree could be associated with a centralised root structure.

All in all though, you seem to be drawing closer to the goal: So, you're set on ∃ for ledger and token, and for the interim, uncommons.app and uncommons.space for the knowledge-based dApps?

Btw, full disclosure: I still keep going back to Oodles for the "popular appeal" group ;-)