Give us a name, and we'll give you $10

The first post of the new column is up! For now, we're going with "Toronto List," but we'll still take and consider suggestions for the rest of the week.

To address Joe's points, as best I can. Joe, please let me know if you want me to forward your comments up the chain to Jake; I'll happily do so.

So, what's in a name?

A for-profit corporation (Gothamist LLC) somehow cannot come up with a title for one of its editorial sections, which may be used as a base for advertising sales.

It is fair to say, though, that having a daily listings column is a feature that is good for Torontoist (that's why we have it!), and that it's thus one that could potentially help sell ads on the site. But it's also just the title we're talking about here, and Joe, you (and Steve Munro) provided generous and much-appreciated gratis help to put together Torontoist's TTC survey last year. The goal of the survey wasn't to profit from it, for me or for Torontoist. It was just a "this could be cool and helpful" idea that turned out to be pretty cool and helpful. I'm not sure if it helped us sell ads over a few months, but that thought hasn't even crossed my mind till now.

It canvasses its readers for a title, offering to pay a de minimis fee for all rights to that title. Not only might the title accrue income from advertising, but it could be trademarked and, later, that trademark could be registered, converting this $10 “crowdsourcing” effort into a significant intellectual-property asset for Gothamist LLC. It would add to the sale price when Gothamist is bought up by some other online venture, which is presumably what Jake Dobkin wants.

As for the "de minimis" fee, you should understand that Torontoist is not anywhere near rolling in money, and that $10 is not nothing as far as that goes (if we were rolling in money, we'd offer to pay more). I was originally not going to offer any money, but figured throwing a few bucks in the pot might get us more and better suggestions. (I mean, if I was a reader, I'd probably toss my hat in the ring.)

I also must disagree that giving a name to a daily event listings post on Torontoist is a "significant intellectual-property asset for Gothamist LLC." To what extent, then, are people who comment, for free, significant assets? Aren't you, a regular commenter, a significant asset? Isn't this conversation an asset, because more people will come back to the post to see my response, then your response, thus creating more impressions on the post and giving Torontoist fractions of a cent from each impression of any ad that might appear on the page? My parents generously gave me my name, gratis, and aren't I, David Topping, an asset for Gothamist LLC? Thinking that way—that everything has a value, that everything must be monetized and optimized—is not only a horrible way to run a site, it'd also make the person doing it totally insane.

....What if your beloved Torontoist, with its endlessly charming and ♥ADORABLE♥ editors, is trying to take advantage of you? Is that inconceivable? What if the editors don’t realize what they’re doing? Does that mean they aren’t doing it after all?

We're gonna ride this week out with Toronto List, but we'll hopefully decide on a new one this weekend. And for the record, I quite like Urban Planning, too.

Thanks to everyone for their suggestions. With rek's permission, we've decided to go with his "Urban Planning" suggestion (and tweak it to "Urban Planner"), beginning today!