the problem with "correspondence chess" lies not in people not being able to grasp it's nature, but in its lack of "pizazz" for lack of a better term.

I haven't tested it out (synchronous vs. asynchronous) on lay people, but my sense as a technical (i.e., computer-industry) person from working with non-technical (yet still quite intelligent!) people over the years is that there's a threshold of technicality that doesn't get easily crossed in terminology or imagery, even if the concepts may seem obvious to the technical folks.  I may be wrong here, but it's my hunch...

I think this is more true in the computer/programmer world than in any other sphere. when people start talking programmerlese, people's eyes just start to glaze because every other word is something with which they are unfamiliar. I stand by my assertion that most people would be able to easily grasp synchronous vs asynchronous and that the problem lies more in that the term "correspondence chess" just isn't very sexy.

It's funny how many people join the site and only play Live games, that think that Live is all you can play here. They don't know they can play correspondence chess  here, what it is and how it works. I've met a lot of people who  joined some of the groups I am in via invitation or via applications and also met some in Live that I had to educate on correspondence chess and also team matches, how they worked.  

When new members join the site are they on joining presented with a video that talks about all the features of chess.com? Explains how groups work, live chess, correspondence chess, extra features/benefits if they become premium members? I think there should be if there isn't. 

Yep, it's called jargon that no one else understands. lol

avik_as also brought up the name 'postal chess' in the poll discussion. I think it's a very fitting name, that or just 'post chess', because you're posting moves as you would post comments in a forum.

"postal chess" lol. do I have to? nah. someone else will do it for me.

so, in order to get around the boring malaise that surrounds the phrase "correspondence chess", I propose we throw caution to the wind and just name it "sexy fighter jet tom cruise insane doom chess" or "SFJTCID chess"

If you're thinking what I think you're thinking, that would probably only happen after a mouse slip in live chess

I'm thinking toward "Realtime Chess" and "Delay Chess" maybe, but even those terms are a little too technical for the kind of person who wouldn't understand the difference between synchronous and asynchronous.

I kind of hate to go there, but I can't escape thinking the most universal and unmistakable way to name these might be to just call them "Short Time Control" and "Long Time Control."  Those aren't the slightest bit catchy or cool sounding, but the only jargon they use is chess jargon.

Not everyone thinks Tom Cruise is sexy though.. so it wouldn't work. :)

Realtime chess to me sounds like it's Live chess, where you  can't walk away from the game. 

"Start To Finish Chess" vs. "Drag Out Complicated Endgames For Three Weeks Chess."  There we go.  Solved it.

I never did get why correspondence chess here was called 'Online Chess', when Live chess is also played online, not like it's played offline. 

yeah, but you get my point.

Hm... I suppose the issue with the name is that it has to be something simple-sounding, yet also has to get across the concept of correspondence chess without oversimplifying it and just saying "slower chess".  You could try something like "decelerated chess" or "extended chess" for that effect with more detail, or you could just try to reword correspondence with something like "communication chess" or "post chess" or you could attempt to get across that games stay in book longer + have better technique with something like "deeper chess" (although that has engine use connotations and is too close in sound to the engine-based "advanced chess", so probably not).  Personally, I think that correspondence chess is the best idea for a name as that's just what it's called and it makes the most sense.  Even though correspondence chess doesn't have much "zing", it adequately describes what it is and is the widely known name for the term.  "Daily chess" and other attempts at sunny names simply don't make much sense as they have no relevance to what correspondence chess is.

lol. no, they wouldn't be too "technical". they just don't really grab attention.

not that I personally think what it is called has to necessarily be exciting, this might not even be important in the context of this specific website. but just looking at it objectively, purely from a marketing/advertising standpoint, isolated from all else, "correspondence chess" just sounds like something most people would rather skip and not even try, especially someone new to chess.com who doesn't know what it is, but maybe that's ok. but I do think whatever it is called, it should be made known, more explicitly, that engine use is not allowed. it's possible a person might think it's fine since engines are in fact allowed in correspondence chess a lot of times, or at least this is something I read somewhere.

"correspondence chess" seems to me the most accurate term.

But maybe a lot of the younger players don´t know that there was a time (stone-age) when people played chess games via post-cards

Terms like "slow chess" or "turn-base chess" also make sense to me.

Correspondence chess does sound like one will be sending their move via 'correspondence/mail'.