125 candidates across 10 construction techniques and two lanes, narrowed by live trademark screening and a 7-dimension score. This is the full field and the reasoning — so you can see how the ten finalists earned their place.
Generated by the naming and copywriting teams together, anchored on the signed narrative (the clear pane / the additional volunteer). Survivors are highlighted; the heaviest trademark casualties are struck through.
Live web + USPTO-direction screening (June 2026). The single-word finance namespace is exactly as saturated as feared — and it took the two most obvious "volunteer" names with it.
| Name | What the live search found | Flag |
|---|
Mechanical portmanteaus (Vollight, Lucevol, Candorhand) and invented "-deer" forms (Mindeer, Standeer) were dropped before screening: clean to trademark, but they mean nothing until explained — the exact failure we're avoiding.
Descriptive functionals (Proofstand, Cleanbook, Reckon, Roster) carry no artifact (Clubproof's weakness). Analytics-clarity words (Lucid, Lumen, Insight, Beacon) were steered away from per the brief — that's the crowded BI register, not guardian-light.
Each survivor scored 1–5 on Distinctiveness, Sound, Stickiness, Expression, Appearance, Story Resonance (does it carry the 5-layer narrative), and Ownability. A name that doesn't carry the artifact caps at 3 on Story — and can't advance. "Layers" = which of the five narrative layers (1 Artifact · 2 System · 3 Recognition · 4 Trust · 5 Promise) the name carries.
| Name | Lane | TM | Dist | Sound | Stick | Expr | Appr | Story | Own | Avg | Layers |
|---|
A preliminary knockout screen, not legal clearance — every survivor still needs formal trademark counsel (USPTO TESS + common-law + state) in Classes 9 / 36 / 42 before adoption.