Well, I still support my proposal for EEFT (East Europe Forward Time). My argument is EEFT looks a lot like the previous denotation (EEST/EEDT) and is in fact based on it, and gets sensible precedence in lists, and is easily memorized once explained in tzdata record. Also, the new element is stylistically neutral and doesn't introduce extraneous concepts. E.g., the entity described isn't prevailingly "Eastern Eastern", like in EEET proposal (Kaliningrad, Belarus, Ukraine). Also, it seems fairly good English (compared to FET). I'm just against introducing a "theory" for this. This is, by now, a once-only action, and as we can't read the future, why bother with anticipating? Even so, "forward" means just "moved forward", "in advance"; but equvalising this to daylight saving, as in Tobias theory proposal, seems somewhat erroneous. -Yury