I'm afraid I haven't read all the replies/posts, I'm more just adding to Christine's original post.
When learning something new, names are important, and so is simplicity. It makes it easier for people to be able to link concepts.
So I think in terms of onboarding, Christine (wait, 'Anonymouse'? Could have sworn it was Christine Kent when I first read it. Did she deregister or something?) has it right when she said:
I think educating the public (and potentially the software rollout) can take these three steps:
* Direct democracy, one person one vote on every issue. Even this is a big step for most voters, so do not assume that Flux should not be simplified down to this initially
* Liquid democracy, delegating but still at the one person one vote level. No trading.
* IBDD, the complexities of trading
But for simplicity's sake, I'd change the name of Liquid Democracy. I know that's the cool term for it, but since people won't ever be using liquid democracy - they only need to understand the concept while onboarding - call it what it is. Delegative Direct Democracy. It is, after all, Direct Democracy with another layer added to it, and that's how they'll learn about it. First they learn about DD, then they add a layer: delegation. Then talk about IBDD.
It's a little change, but I think it's important.
Or, as it appears on Wikipedia, "direct democracy with delegable proxies".