Not being successful while representing the project truthfully is not evidence of scam. Not being successful while dishonestly promoting the project as something it absolutely is not, is.


False equivalence. This is not a new product. It is a lazy copy of other people's code with a few settings changed. Those changes do not equate to a 'new product' any more than Heinz baked beans being sold in a store-brand tin equates to a 'revolutionary' new product.

You want to believe that all this coin needs is marketing in order to be successful? That is, at best, magical thinking and, in actuality, more a plea for the 'devs' to try and find a bunch of greater fools to pay more for your coins than you did, than a viable model with which to assert value. There is no reason for anybody to want to buy SIGT but plenty of reasons for them to steer well clear of it.

Which part of claiming re-skinned white-label 'Marketplace' and 'Web-Wallet' browser code as being 'Our Technology' suggests innovation?

Let alone 'Revolutionary' innovation:

If the sole claim of innovation is that the 'dev' selected a different bunch of algorithms for the brief PoW period, which you believe equates to a viable economic platform of value for this coin to build on, I suggest you reconsider putting quite so much stock in your deeply-held beliefs, as they are clearly akin to becoming religious in nature at this point.

So, in that this entire project has been touted as being revolutionary and innovative, in order to pump the market-price while the 'dev team' profited from selling their mined bags to naive newbies, the absence of anything revolutionary or innovative is, indeed, evidence of scam.

I responded to a DM somebody sent me alerting to the fact that this clonecoin had been fleecing ill-informed newbies, by investigating and posting my findings immediately in order to warn them. There are so many scam operations running in this industry that it is nigh-on impossible to know of them all and, as you can see in the Signatum thread, and most other scams I have posted warnings in, the response from the fanboi and scammer shill accounts is usually an aggressive attempt to keep burying these warnings as quickly as possible, requiring even more of my time and attention maintaining a persistent presence for these advisory posts in order to ensure the majority of victims are alerted to the facts.

Scammers are highly motivated to discredit and demean any threat to their ability to continue defrauding their victims. Add to that the mix of newbie fanbois who convince themselves it cannot be a scam because they've invested so much money into it already, and the chorus of 'shoot the messenger' is supported even further, adding to the difficulty in promoting the truth within such threads.

This is why there is little point in trying to tag all scams, because there would only be time to post the occasional warning in each, which would be swiftly buried.

Everybody wants to believe they can get in on the ground floor of a coin which will 'moon' to stratospheric values so they can get rich without having to do anything more than click on a few exchange trades. If the coin has no unique and innovative tech which serves to provide a new way to solve an existing problem, or doesn't have a viable commercial platform and economic model, it has no value whatsoever and is being traded solely on speculative hype and lies, constantly looking for 'greater fools' to sell on to.

As i said, learn to spot the signs, they aren't difficult to see. You just have to take off your FOMO-tinted spectacles.

FFS, it is not "may of" it is "may have".

Ignoramus.

Your dishonesty is blatant when it comes to these things, with your first port of call the reductio ad absurdum in order to desperately distract from the proven fact.

'skankhunt42' clearly attempted to imply he was the singer that 'borderline' was asking about, and he chose to qualify that with a reference to playing both the guitar and piano. He knew damn well that he was being asked if he is James Hinton.

The fact is you're either incredibly dumb, or you are one of the scammers if you keep insisting on answering to these issues with dishonest argument and logical fallacies.

Well, for starters, skankhunt42 appears to actually be attempting to claim he is James Hinton, the guy in his avatar, by answering to borderline's question in the affirmative. Sure, he'll now claim that he just meant he just happens to sing and play guitar and piano and that, of course, he didn't really mean to imply that he is the guy in his avatar etc. etc. but it is just more lies on top of lies about this 'innovative' coin project.

LOL, it looks like he is actually pretending to be James Hinton by answering you that he also plays piano and guitar.

The actual musician @therangejames is not 'skankhunt42'.

Are you saying this picture is used by the Signatum dev on a fake profile?

Do you have a link for it?

I'd like to ask why? What makes you think this coin is worth holding on to, given that it is just another clonecoin with no innovation, just plenty of hype and market-manipulation.

Sock-puppet or naive newbie?

Seriously, what possible reasoning are you using to justify buying and holding this coin? I'm genuinely astonished that people are still falling for these scams.

Because you should know that there is a good reason why you get quick answers in this thread, and that is due to it being actively shilled by fanbois and scammer accounts routinely making utterly false claims towards 'inside info' about how the industry 'whales' are secretly wanting to buy in to this coin.
Except that claim is a complete lie because, as I said, Signatum is nothing more than a copy-paste clone of another coin with a few of the usual settings changed to make it sound like it is 'different'. It is not, it is simply a Blackcoin clone and they couldn't be bothered to change the leading address character from 'B' to 'S' to even try and make it look like they were a competent crew.

Sloppy pump-and-dump is sloppy.

If you are a genuine noob and not a sock-puppet, give yourself a minute to think about the reality of the situation and ignore that FOMO causing you to buy in to these scams because you will lose your bitcoin in the end. That's why these scammers set these things up, to con you into buying their bags of useless 'Signatum' in exchange for your BTC. For a few months of social-engineering and promoting copied code as their innovative 'tech' they can steal ever more from you and those like you, who believe this to be a legit project, until there's no more marks to trick and then they shut it down and move on to their next 'innovative' hyped clonecoin. Rinse-and-repeat.

That is all this is.

As I said before, pointing out other suspect coins is not a rebuttal. I've only so much time available to investigate these things, albeit I have no reason to believe that the vast majority of altcoins and ICOs are anything more than cynical cash-grabs promoted as legit projects to people who have little understanding of either the tech or the industry.

This project, however, appears to be a revival of the typical pump-and-dump clonecoin scam perpetrated long before ICOs were in fashion and there is every reason to believe it is not the only clonecoin project under the control of the scammer 'dev team', as a number of fanbois and sock-puppet accounts appear to share very similar interests.

BTW, that wallet address I previously mentioned at the top of the rich list appears to be routinely divesting itself of large portions of coins these past days. It has gone from 13.5 million a day or so ago to 11 million. Just something to take into account when considering how much attention you should be paying to market activity.

Pro-tip, when invited to look through the post history or to google a forum user, please do so as it is frequently found that the lying scammer sock-puppet accounts who try to so blithely dismiss those who expose their fraud, rely on people simply accepting their word and not actually checking for themselves.

When they do check, however, they can quickly see that the person making the claim is clearly lying. They then need to ask themselves why that person was so compelled to lie.

Which part of the previous posts whereby I have presented objective reasoning and evidence in a calm and dignified manner offends you?

Which part of the real evidence I have presented do you claim to be 'doctored'? Please present evidence of this or withdraw the accusation. You are not helping your argument one bit by repeatedly asserting things which are patently untrue.

Pretty much every time they say this:

There is no innovation in this coin whatsoever. It is a clonecoin, pure and simple.

That is, and has been, the lie from the very beginning. Fuelled by a plethora of sock-puppet forum accounts frequently posting fanbois cheerleading or false news of 'inside info' that big players in the cryptocurrency industry are interested in this coin, when there is absolutely nothing for them to be interested in at all.

They haven't taken the Blackcoin code and improved on it, they've taken the Blackcoin code and simply chosen a few different attributes regarding which PoW algo to use and things like the coin supply, blocktime, reward etc and then renamed it 'Signatum'. The exact same routine all the clonecoins are created by.

Forgetting to change the leading 'B' in the address format, though, that was truly sloppy.

There is no market value, that is the problem. You have a 'dev team' who are miners and have managed to hype the supposed 'innovative' nature of this coin in order to sell it to a bunch of newbies who think it is a legitimate claim and that the coin has valuable technology which the cryptocurrency industry will want to buy in to and it absolutely does not.

You are being fooled into buying in to a coin where the devs have lied to you about it being innovative and the lie they used wasn't even that credible in the first place because, as I have already pointed out, setting the choice of algo to use in a clonecoin is just another minor option change.

Going back to what I said about it likely being a clone of Blackcoin, due to the dev team's failure to even bother with changing the leading 'B' on the address, I thought I'd actually take a look and it turns out I am right:

The point is that the community is not being given anything innovative at all and that is the ENTIRE basis for the fake hype used to promote this coin.

Switching to PoS isn't going to magically make the price increase, btw, but it is a way for the scammers to try and convince people to buy and hold these useless coins in the meantime, while they sell off their bags.

I understand that, but there is only so much complex information these noobs can understand so I am trying to limit it to the simplest examples of where they themselves can see they are being lied to by this 'dev team'.

The web 'services' are not new tech, they've been around for years now and this project is not offering anything different from every other copy-pasta 'feature' that has gone before.

Setting a different PoW algorithm in a clonecoin is no different to setting the block-time or money supply or reward, or any of the other variables which define a coin. It is just a section of the coin-code where you set these particular attributes.

It does NOT require ANY innovative or unique coding, that is why there are so many clonecoins with different variables which are all based on the same coin-code. As I said, given that Signatum is a PoW/PoS codebase and has a leading 'B' for its address, I'm going with it being a clone of 'Blackoin'.

Speaking of 'unique tech', I have taken a quick look at the Signatum website where they make this rather bold claim towards their 'technology':

Except, of course, the marketplace isn't their technology at all. As I said, it is merely a copy-paste of a basic UI you can download and skin yourself:

Stick your logo in the section marked and off you go.

As I said, the 'dev team' isn't developing anything, they are just fobbing you off on cheap copy-pasta wallets and web 'services'.

Then why does it have copy-paste code? Why would it have an address format of another coin?


LOL, sure it does, kiddo. And Litecoin's leading 'L' in its addresses stands for?

Look, there's a reason a coin is normally coded with a distinctive leading character and it is quite simple. If you copy an address from, say, a Blackcoin wallet, which is probably the basis for this coin's code as it is found on many clonecoins, and then accidentally paste it into a Signatum wallet and send coins to it, thinking it is a Signatum address, you'll lose those coins and they won't be received by anybody because they have been sent to an address derived from the Blackcoin blockchain, not the Signatum one.

If, however, Signatum had a leading 'S' or 's' then the send you would be trying to make with a leading 'B' address would fail and you would not lose your coins.

That is only an example of why you would look to use lesser-used leading characters in a wallet and, more importantly, it also proves beyond reasonable doubt that Signatum is absolutely a clonecoin because no developer would choose a leading 'B' this late in the industry as it is already used on so many other coins.

As I said, this 'dev team' couldn't be bothered to even change that bit of code from the wallet they copy-pasted from.

Well firstly the scammer's coins are going to be in exchange addresses, not desktop wallet addresses and, secondly, the whole point is to convince newbies to buy and hold the coin as long as they can, so of course some of those accounts will unfortunately be those newbies hoarding the coin, thinking it will make them rich eventually. BTW, I'd also suggest there's probably a good case to consider that these 'dev team created' 'explorer' pages may well be omitting the dev team's coin addresses:

It is very unusual for there to be such a large proportion of a coin's issued supply to be outside of the top 100 addresses for such a short-lived coin.

BTW, just as proof that this 'dev team' isn't even developing this coin and are merely copy-pasting this useless clonecoin's code:

See the top address with 13.3 million coins at address B8Zkn2SfqQKE4uNJJfmuJNXgwak5NrwSW5 ?

The number of coins isn't the issue, the issue is that the addresses for this coin lead with an upper-case 'B' and not an 'S'. They couldn't even be bothered to change the address formatting to at least lead with the same letter as the name they gave this coin. That is how lazy these scammers are and how this coin is solely aimed at naive newbies who don't know any better.

To make it seem like a valuable feature of this coin's 'tech'. The truth is they simply copy-paste the code from another coin and change a few elements of it like the PoW algorithm and hype it as being 'innovative'.

Why not when they just have to copy and paste the same code and also pretend like they are 'innovative'? When one clonecoin comes out with a 'feature' that seems to attract newbies into believing it is important, then other scam clonecoins will be launched with it, too.

Business is business in any industry and if people want to pay bitcoin to mine that algorithm then it will be added. As for 'what to mine', I assume they simply report on which coin is currently showing the most profitable returns on mining, which is just calculated through the block reward, difficulty and market price. If the market price is being artificially inflated, which it is, then it will look like a great coin to mine.

The scammer 'devs' are all miners, by the way. Their accounts all show activity in mining threads as well as this and, in some cases, some other scam clonecoins. So they can mine the crap out of the coin at the beginning when difficulty is low and then put their rigs on to Nicehash and get paid directly in bitcoin from the people who think there's profit to be made in mining this coin when they've stirred up enough interest through their hype and fake trading volume.

You have just answered your own question. Yes, they promote their coin as having no 'premine' because newbies think that makes it more legitimate a project, but I have just explained that the 'dev team' scammers are miners themselves, so they had more than enough time to mine this coin and build up a large stock for themselves in order to sell on to gullible newbie 'investors'. With both trading and rig-rental through services like Nicehash, they've got plenty of ways to make money from the fake hype.

Much of the 'dev' work they are doing is merely talk about what they are going to do, in order to keep hyping, another is that by seeming to be working on the wallet they can keep pretending like they are really 'working' on the wallet when all they are doing is copy-pasting code.

With the amount of bitcoin they can earn from selling their bags of mined SIGT and/or renting their mining rigs on Nicehash, it is only a tiny cost to them to buy some white-label 'WebWallet' and 'Marketplace' code scripts and stick a logo on them to keep up the pretense of developing this coin 'project'.

There are hundreds and hundreds of similar copy-paste clone altcoins and the vast majority of them are exactly the same pump and dump scheme. A few may have genuine dev teams trying to make something commercial work in the longer term, but those coins won't be being hyped with fake sock-puppet shill accounts and fake trading volume.