How does it tell you nothing? It’s a great name precisely because it is self-explanatory. I’m surprised you don’t see that. Both co- for “joint”, “communal”, “shared” and -didact for “teaching”, “learning” are very common. One comes from Latin, the other from Greek and they’re both used very widely in many, many languages. Think of words like cooperation, didactic, combined, autodidact,… Codidact immediately suggests things like “teaching each other” or “learning together”. Just like autodidact means “self-taught”. The first time I heard the name, I immediately understood it as such and it brought to mind a place where we each learn from one another: a Q&A site. The name is informative and spot on.
There’s nothing cutesy about it. As I said above, it is self-explanatory and informative. Presumably, your native language is one that uses neither “co-” nor “-didact” so that’s why you find the name confusing. Although it’s a shame you chose to make your point in such a rude and confrontational manner. Just because you don’t understand something, doesn’t mean nobody does. While you, for whatever reason, might not recognize the meaning of this word, you should be aware that it is self evident to many and perfectly clear.
It’s not working if you have to explain it. I wonder how many other people didn’t understand it either until it was explained. I expect the most.
When I first saw “codidact”, the pattern didn’t parse to anything recognizable. My brain substituted “code addict”, and now I have a hard time not seeing that. Remember, the above is all subconscious before deliberate thought happens. I then figured “cod” was somehow a reference to software code, and the rest was just gibberish.
But again (since you completely ignored this important point when responding to my last answer), that only works after a lot of marketing. Where are you going to get the resources for that?
I did not ignore your point. My point about paint, soap and coffee works in the cases with and without lots of budget for marketing.
The only case where it does not work is the type of people that do not watch Sopranos because they thought it was opera.
In the end it is different cons and pros for different types of brand names. There is no right or wrong here.
I suggest that we should not care about that small group and focus on the much larger group of people that look at brand names in a more associative way and who will first feel the emotion that a brand name conveys rather than focus on the literal meaning.
Sorry to hear that. But that’s your subconscious. We can’t really be held responsible for it. I’m sorry you don’t understand the name, but others do. You may even have a valid point somewhere in here, but if so, your aggressive and confrontational attitude makes it very hard to see. Shame that.