throwaway934261

> 4) Does this company have a clear and important mission?

> Without this, I usually get bored. More importantly, companies that don’t have this usually have a hard time recruiting enough great people to work with them, and thus struggle to become very large.

Says the man whose first big exit was Loopt, a drain-circling "Grindr for flip-phones" that only got acqui-hired because a Sequoia Capital board member who'd invested in Loopt pulled strings to get Green Dot to buy it and cover his investment. Harsh, I know, but hardly inaccurate:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=385178

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3687816

It would be bikeshedding if we were all, for no good reason and without prompting, suggesting names that we preferred, with no consensus emerging.

Instead what I see in this thread is a clear consensus that the current name is atrocious, even to the point of being detrimental to the long-term success of the project, and should therefore be changed.

Personally, I refuse to use or recommend this product as long as its current name remains. And to those who think I'm being petty, 1) I can afford to be petty given how many database options (NoSQL or otherwise) are out there, and 2) market forces should punish products with names like this, or else we'll eventually find ourselves debating the merits of HerpesDB vs. ManureDB.