Topic: [ANN] Signatum 2.0 - page 37. (Read 102089 times)

I agree on poll option 1. If signatum 2 goes alive sigt 1 must be "burned". However i'm really intersted how do you "burn" those sigt 1 coins 

Please let me know how will u make those unusable to anyone!

I agree on poll option 1. If signatum 2 goes alive sigt 1 must be "burned". However i'm really intersted how do you "burn" those sigt 1 coins 

Please let me know how will u make those unusable to anyone!

Signatum 1 is not dead and not going to be dead 👈
19.5 Guy 👈❤️🙏🏻❤️🤠🤡

Why burn old coins, I do not understand?
This is also how to get your bitcoin gold and at the same time burn bitcoin.
What danger does the signatum1 have for signatum2 in order to burn it?

Leave the corpse of the Sigt1 at rest

you can find all information on the first 3 threads.

The total swap supply will be 34,375,000 coins, its lower than 137,000,000 actual supply for sigt 1.0
so thats the reason why coinswap is 4:1

with an additional 28% split across team members (20%) and the treasury fund (8%). As the coin supply is projected to increase year-on-year that ownership share and treasure fund will over time be diluted significantly to around 4.5% after 20 years.

How will the premine be handled?

To be clear, the premine will not be paid out on day zero of the new blockchain.  The payments will be made on a monthly/quarterly basis (salary/bonuses of sorts).  All addresses of the core team will be made visible and the funds will be controlled by Cryptovore and Squbs within the core team. We are keen on making this a transparent process.  We are doing our uppermost to ensure that this is treated in a professional manner, aligning developers incentives with that of investors and keen to alleviate many aspects of principal-agent asymmetries.  We are dedicated to making this work for all of us.

The PoW Algorithm

The new PoW is being built on the Lyra2REv2 hashing algorithm.  This algorithm was chosen as it has been peer-reviewed and is currently one of the most up to date implementations on the market, whilst being reasonably power efficient, comparatively.  Moreover, most miners and market participants are already knowledgeable about how to mine and calculate profitability for the algorithm, thus significantly reducing barriers to entry.  Various algorithms have been  considered, but we believe the trade-offs are marginal.

How can i vote for option 1 ?

But yes, we should have listened to the warnings. Now lets see how this new coin is before we judge.

You should have listened to the warnings I have been posting 2 months in row, nobody believed me, everyone called me FUD'er bla bla
This is what you get beeing a following sheep, use your brain and this won't happen

Also cryptodevil posted some real prove afterwards, noobs didn't listn just believed what they wanted to believe
You can't recover this project, you can't revive a drown horse, it's dead: no investors will ever invest in this project anymore
Leave this be you all lost your money, you knew investing in cryptocurrencies were high risk, get over it.

Okay, wise guy. Do you have any idea how much money people lost on Sigt? I am down 95% on my investment.

I am pretty mad at the whole situation, but I do realize the current team should not be held responsible. I imagine there are many less level-headed types around there.


The current team had nothing to do with the nodes getting shut down, the original team going missing etc. - all are community members who've been with the coin since its inception.
They could still get targeted and revealing their identities could very well compromise their personal lives, their jobs etc.


If you had trust issues with anonymous devs, you shouldn't have bought/mined sigt in the first place. Invest in an ICO and keep this discussion productive.