HACK FACTORY ... (The Target Field example is specious, since the Twins sold the naming rights.)
I disagree. As I see it, the analogy holds up whether it's the Twins and Target Field, the Chicago Bears and Soldier Field, the Red Sox at Fenway, or any number of other comparisons.
TC MAKER ... (I find the "but we spent so much time on the logo" argument irrelevant. The group drives the marketing; marketing has no intrinsic value.)
While Wammie's efforts are valuable and appreciated, I agree that in some regard those efforts should not be a significant deciding factor in what we decide to do with the open question of our collective identity. On the other hand, marketing does have intrinsic value. If it didn't, how would Target justify paying millions of dollars for naming rights on a baseball stadium?
TC MAKER AT THE HACK FACTORY
Pros: Inertia, we don't have to do anything to keep things the way it is.
Cons: Confusing, and has the disadvantages of both names.
I'm not sure that is the way it is. The name of the organization is Twin Cities Maker, a.k.a. TC Maker. The name of the space is The Hack Factory. If TC Maker decides to open another facility (a bike and auto shop, for example), that might be given a different name. We are not "TC Maker at the Hack Factory", we are TC Maker, and we work at the Hack Factory.
If there are others in the Hacker/Maker/Craft movement who know us as TC Maker; that's great. If, however, they know us as the Hack Factory, that's great too. People who want or need to find us will find us by either name. Google any variation discussed here, and our website shows up as the first result. Pump any name into Google Maps, and our mailing address will pop up. Write a check to either name, and I believe Orion will have no trouble depositing it.
I'd prefer to keep it just as it is: An umbrella organization that can be flexible, with a clearly branded identity for our facility, or perhaps I should say our first facility.