I don't understand how this coin cares for signatum owners. If the old owners won't be able to double dip, how can they be considered cared about?
The team has absolutely no obligation to even implement a swap.
And as of now, signatum 1.0 still has a 182 satoshi value to it, you can buy it, sell it, convert it to btc, eth whatever you want. So anyone without any prior signatum, can come now, and accumulate sigt at a very low price, at a fraction of what we believers and holders bought, and get the same 4:1 ratio conversion. This is no different than a premined coin sale, or an ICO.
It has been confirmed that ALL the original nodes (hard-coded into the wallet) are down. If the current team didn't add their own nodes, the chain would be dead right now, essentially. You couldn't even sync your wallet, let alone transfer funds to sell them. The definition of a dead coin.
It is unfortunate that the price is what it is, and as of yet we haven't seen many large buys. The overall sentiment on future outlook is still negative.
I fail to see any serious priority given to previous signatum owners. The only privilege we get is we don't have to open a new account at yobit to buy sigt for the swap, since we already have an account and sigts in our wallet.
What is the alternative? Let the chain die and everyone loses their entire investment? You are lamenting about things the community or the current devs had no control over. It is facetious, at best, to expect preferential treatment for being an 'old' holder. It is NOT fair, but there's nothing that could have been done differently.
The new sigt 2.0 dev team were also devs of 1.0. They have some form of responsibility for those who expected to see doc back, as it was stated officially that he would be back multiple times in the old discord. I know they were fooled aswell, but still, they do have and obviously feel some responsibility for it, as they state in their announcement for 2.0.
Given the amount of whining and incessant shrieking many in the community project to the team (which has been, may I remind you, paid $0 for their efforts thus far), it's a wonder they're doing this at all. They could just as easily have decided to drop the whole thing, and create a new coin, no swaps involved.
While this is a well thought-out and warm mutual feeling between us and them, they fail to prove that in their action. Because more CAN be done, let us keep 1.0. If you are true to your word, 1.0 has no chance to live while 2.0 exists, and maybe we can dump some of our 1.0's and make a little extra, a small gift for those who held for long.
Let me just repeat myself one more time, just to drive the point home.
This is a curated list of dead coins:
http://deadcoins.com/Dead coins have no value. They cannot be exchanged, transferred, traded in any meaningful way.
It's probably where sigt v1 might end up very soon. Why would you want to 'keep' your dead coins? Are you a hoarder?
You don't get to 'keep' anything. At that point it's dead as a parrot. To paraphrase the great Monty Python:
'E's not pinin'! 'E's passed on! This coin is no more! He has ceased to be! 'E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker! 'E's a stiff! Bereft of life, 'e rests in peace! If you hadn't nailed 'im to the perch 'e'd be pushing up the daisies! 'Is transactions processes are now 'istory! 'E's off the twig! 'E's kicked the bucket, 'e's shuffled off 'is mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisible!! THIS IS AN EX-COIN!!
The ONLY ways you can get some value out of your dead coins is:
1. someone forks the chain
Why would they do that, though, when anyone can just start a new chain without whining and entitled holders feeling they have a right to decide everything about the direction of the project?
2. someone creates a new chain and allows you to swap
This is an act of pure altruism. Again, why give people free coins when you can just control the entire supply much easier starting from square 1? And no dealing with any holder BS?
It's not a wonder they are trying to implement this swap because they didn't get paid. Their names were on the dev list for a suspected scam coin. They might have incentive to clear their names of any doubt if attached.
Theoretically, could they keep the v1 nodes online and then let sigt v1 stay on yobit, then sell the acquired v1 during the swap for a gain? Not saying they might do it. I'm saying could they do it? Yes they could, if they were bad people.
I don't believe them to be scammers. I believe they tried to do their best with v1. But my opinion has no weight. Public must believe them. And for the public, and the trader who has no info about how blockchains might work, this swap might look suspicious after all.
To win back those who might be skeptical, wouldn't it be better for the devs to let people keep v1 during the swap, then kill the nodes. This would clear any doubt there might occur.
So instead of clearing the doubts on this swap by letting people hold on to their worthless v1s, they choose to contend with criticism and "whining and incessant shrieking" from the community, as you put it. Why ?
And answering a question from the community by calling it offensive, unnecessary, whining, or saying "don't swap if you don't like it", instead of explaining what will be done with the acquired v1s, is inconsistent with the transparency principles promised on the v2 website.