In daylily circles, it's considered especially poor form to name a cross that's not officially registered with the American Hemerocallis Society. This make sense. If everyone named their crosses willy-nilly then tracking the parentage of different cultivars is that much more difficult. As Oscie Whatley noted over twenty years ago in The Art of Hybridizing "Such fervor to stake a name claim hasn't been equaled since the Oklahoma land rush. Consequently many a good name has been gobbled up forever by cultivars soon forgotten" (pg. 25-6). Relatedly, a breeder shouldn't register a cross unless it contributes to the overall universe of daylily hybrids. A named daylily should be exceptional.
So, I'm committing some grave sins here, but at least I'm aware of it and making a public confession. I tried several crosses this summer but this is the only one that worked, and this is the only seedling that sprouted this autumn. Griffin is standing watch over 'Griffin's Hello World' (noid pink daylily x 'Siloam David Kirschoff'). I decided to document it now because it could easily die on me. I've done my homework, but daylily hybridizing is definitely a learning-by-experience endeavor. Given its infancy, it's ridiculous that I would name it, even for internal record-keeping. Yet, I wanted to make note of the small victory.
I did, however, check the Tinker's Gardens database to see if it's already taken (there's a 'Hello World' from 1966, but no 'Griffin') -- I'm not that much of a daylily barbarian.