Necessary to keep this token in the TCR
As the requester feels he is losing ground on the migrated token argument, he is suddenly switching the narrative of his arguments. Now suddenly the token symbol is not centered, which is a baseless claim. There is a small amount of human error possible, we are not robots, we can't crop an image with 100% precision.
Continuing to the previous discussion, it's necessary to keep this token in the TCR, as it is even still being traded on Uniswap as we speak. Both REP and REPv2 are actively being traded on Uniswap, so why should we remove this token from the TCR? That would just be dumb. On top of that, there are numerous of more possible use cases able by keeping this unique Ethereum token in the token curated list. Keeping the initial Augur token in the TCR is necessary for not narrowing down the use cases of the TCR to only 1 use case. This token should remain in the TCR, because it holds a lot of valuable information. By removing this token from the TCR, a precedent will be set to remove all token swapped, (seemingly) dead projects, etc. This is nowhere stated in the TCR, and we should not want to do this. That would only remove value from the TCR.
Furthermore, there is no ground for the removal of this Ethereum token, which is an unique token on the Ethereum blockchain. The migrated token that the requester is referring to, has another ticker, another logo, AND another token contract address, so they are far from duplicates. The differentiation between the 2 tickers, "REP" and "REPv2", is enough to protect the unexperienced traders, as people mainly search on tickers. Significantly more, than they search on names. And even if they search on the name, they immediately see that not only the ticker does not match the token they want to buy, but ALSO the logo. At that moment they will most certainly understand that they are looking at another token. There is no confusion possible here.
As this token holds a lot of information, we SHOULD NOT remove it from the TCR. On top of that, no policy rule exists saying that this submission should be removed. There is ALSO NO precedent. Instead, the policy leans more towards NOT DENYING tokens based on token swaps. And last, but not least, there is enough differentiation between the two tokens (ticker AND logo). Because of all of the above, jurors in this case should vote NO, to keep this token in the TCR.