I think we’re still at the same point as we were on this as months ago. If we can find one name that everyone can get behind then sure, but I don’t think that’s going to happen. We have a small sample of people and even amongst them, there’s no agreement. And there are far more things to direct our energy towards. See: The urgency of the product release
That being said, let me re-state the case for Couchers.org.
Our identity is going to come from so much more than our name, but even then there is identity to forge. Our narrative is that we are the community reclaiming couch-surfing. It is not CS’s term, and we are taking it back. The very act of couch-surfing is about non-transactional generosity, curiosity of people, friendship, and the building and sense of local and worldwide community. That forms the basis of our values and mission. It is the core activity to the platform, and we empower and support the communities that form around this activity.
We should be sure to enforce this narrative in our branding, so it doesn’t seem we’re just something like CS, and that effort will come closer to the release.
I know that some people are concerned that being reactionary will stifle our sense of self, but as long as we are aware of that and build our identity on these core ideals and through active community building then it is not an issue. Being reactionary has let everyone know what we stand for, and has brought in everyone here. We currently have the largest active volunteer force in hospex, and more people working on this than are employed in CS. This strategy is working because we are clear about our goals. The name Couchers.org helps embody this. The lack of clarity in both BeWelcome and Trustroots has been to their detriment.