That really sounds like an unnecessary constraint. It’s not as if the only thing people are going to hear about the organisation is the name; presumably they’d also hear something about what it does.
In my view, a name that doesn’t need to come with an explanation is worth more than a name that makes for good in joke.
In my view, a name that doesn’t need to come with an explanation is worth more than a name that makes for good in joke
False dichotomy. “Meaningful names are better than in-joke names” is not the same thing as “the name must necessarily be meaningful”.
That really sounds like an unnecessary constraint. It’s not as if the only thing people are going to hear about the organisation is the name; presumably they’d also hear something about what it does.
In my view, a name that doesn’t need to come with an explanation is worth more than a name that makes for good in joke.
False dichotomy. “Meaningful names are better than in-joke names” is not the same thing as “the name must necessarily be meaningful”.