[ANN] Signatum 2.0

[mak013]

both choices are bad. and after these choices looks likes we cann`t trust devs. add coins 1 v1 to 10 v2 or change 1v1 to 1 v2 may be right.
no one knows how good or bad will be v2.

[roy2266]

1st option!

[Cl1ddy]

First option please

[Rigorous]

The max. supply is already decided to be about 150 million. Choosing 1:20 seems the obvious choice for existing holders.

However, there still needs to be a balanced reward to incentivize mining the new coin. Considering the reward scheme and block time have yet to be determined and are probably dependent on the path taken, the choice between 1:4 or 1:20 may turn out to be moot.

There is a trust issue with option 1. If holders send coins to a burn address, how can they be sure the swap and burn actually takes place? How can they be sure this is not a scheme to have holder send their coins to be sold by the recipient?

The arguments are that Signatum coins are almost worthless, there are barely buyers, there is no development. In other words what do you have to lose?

But then one could retort, why bother burning them?

We do not believe it is conscionable that some benefit at the expense of others when such significant information asymmetries exist.

There is also such a thing as due diligence.

It almost looks like a false dichotomy.

[vitos_i]

I can not vote, but I choose the first option

[machamizu]

I vote for 1st option.

[sergik73]

I vote for option 1!

[phieudu0408]

First option is my choice.

[dottorburry]

1st Option!

[beph]

There is a trust issue with option 1. If holders send coins to a burn address, how can they be sure the swap and burn actually takes place? How can they be sure this is not a scheme to have holder send their coins to be sold by the recipient?

This is your only salient point.

You have 2 options:

1) you can trust the old team (doc and signatumd, missing in action)

2) you can trust the new team (all early community members, frequent updates, active development).

There is no option 3.

I do not believe the old team are coming back, not after what they did and after their identities were revealed.

Thus, I'll be swapping all my coins hoping for the best.

[Ginzink]

The max. supply is already decided to be about 150 million. Choosing 1:20 seems the obvious choice for existing holders.

However, there still needs to be a balanced reward to incentivize mining the new coin. Considering the reward scheme and block time have yet to be determined and are probably dependent on the path taken, the choice between 1:4 or 1:20 may turn out to be moot.

There is a trust issue with option 1. If holders send coins to a burn address, how can they be sure the swap and burn actually takes place? How can they be sure this is not a scheme to have holder send their coins to be sold by the recipient?

The arguments are that Signatum coins are almost worthless, there are barely buyers, there is no development. In other words what do you have to lose?

But then one could retort, why bother burning them?

We do not believe it is conscionable that some benefit at the expense of others when such significant information asymmetries exist.

There is also such a thing as due diligence.

It almost looks like a false dichotomy.

The one who would buy Sigt 1 when they can no longer be swapped is not the big whales, but small investors who dont have the same amount of time put in. And for thoose even small purchases going to trash would could be a big impact on their funds. So i apreciate that they burn it, even though i would like to swap and then sell for myself off course. Good thing we dont get the option to dump on others who have not paid as much attention. Now you could say that potential buyers can only blame themself, but the devs are better than that.

Option one is the obvious choice for me too.

[curapid]

Idea is great! Good luck!

[ryanlitwiller]

I don't understand why option 2 needs to be 1/20th?

I vote option 3, You get ONE coin on the new blockchain for every FOUR Signatum V1 coins you swap to the new blockchain. You will then get to keep your Signatum V1 coins in the process too and are free to trade them afterwards. Hence no coins will be burned.

[beph]

I don't understand why option 2 needs to be 1/20th?

I vote option 3, You get ONE coin on the new blockchain for every FOUR Signatum V1 coins you swap to the new blockchain. You will then get to keep your Signatum V1 coins in the process too and are free to trade them afterwards. Hence no coins will be burned.

Burning coins creates the assurance that any swapped coins will not be dumped on unsuspecting buyers and it is the fairest option for everyone.

Read the third post of the ANN again.

[argamemnon]

i seem not to be able to vote......

[beph]

i seem not to be able to vote......

It appears only Junior members or above can vote.

[vikingchild]

To those who would like to vote but cannot do so here due to their rank, are kindly invited to participate in the #polls on Discord https://discord.gg/Z3sztp

[princehandsome]

after i read why OP get negative trust, because he always cheats and do not never trust what he has to offer. why people here still believe want to benefit from this project? while OP get negative trust.

[TheMinero]

1st option too!

[genri11]

1st option