for me it is definitely Open Source Circular Economy e.V.
if we choose OSCE e.V and it starts off as a page on OSCEdays.org, well, maybe that’s a small, temporary inconvenience.
if we choose OSCEdays e.V. and it evolves into a multi-purpose network of projects, research initiatives, educational resources and events, the name no longer makes sense and that is a long-term problem.
Same. The days is a project supported by the association but also kind of independent in some ways.
So OPEN SOURCE CIRCULAR ECONOMY e.V. for me
We had those discussions with another association here in France. One suggestion was to call the structure friends of XXX. It gives more independence to the project and larger scope to the structure. I don’t know if it makes sense in that case
Just want to say, I would vote for including “Days” - because “OSCE” is a big abstract concept. It is like “economy e.V.” – It is a huge (& therefor empty?) claim. Also a bit like “Cradle to Cradle” puts a brand on something that should be an open term… can only work as a really open term. Now you can’t talk about the concept and not talk about them at the same time. Which is sad.
If we add “Days” to it, we have something unique – we show that we represent one approach. And we show our heritage. The story will always be “They started as an event and now they also …” So why not keep the days!
And it has a positive and nice message: It started as 5 “Days” - now they are permanent active … and in the future we will have 365 OSCE"days" in the year. Because we have an OSCE …