Is this what you’re suggesting?
Safecoin (1/1)
Safecoin (1/100)
Safecoin (1/1,000,000)
or
Safecoin (1)
Safecon (0.01)
Safecoin (0.000001)
I think we’ve had cabin fever since the crowd sale. 
1 Like
I’d personally prefer (example):
“Item X costs 0.0237 SafeCoin”
Which is easy to understand since I have 100k SafeCoin in my wallet.
1 Like
100 hundreds equals a safecoin
100 thousands equals a hundred
.001 = a thousands
.01 = a hundreds
that’s 50 hundreds = .50 safecoin
that’s 50 thouands = .050 safecoin or its also 5 hundreds = .05 safecoin
@whiteoutmashups the division is a separate unit - it is a representation of a decimal of safecoin yet it will be a whole number.
1 Like
Hey what about having this instead:
Safecoin (1/1) (1)
Safedime (1/10) (0.1)
Safenickel (1/20) (0.05)
Safepenny or Safecent (1/100) (0.01)
Safeling (1/1,000) (like “Seedling” lol idk)
Safetoshi (1/1,000,000) (micro transactions)
Yes, I just assumed this is the way it would work, unless I missed the elephant 
I assumed this was the way…maybe there is a different thinking paradigm with those still on non metric systems for some measurements.
1 Like
At first I disregarded this topic, but after reading through it I am hit with a lot of thoughts. I think SAFE Coin should take advantage of what has been learned from previous events. I think there is writing on the wall. Look at what has happened with Bitcoin. We all can agree Project SAFE and intertwined Safe Coin is in a different universe in regard to adoption and BTC’s 10,000%+ value increase in such a short time I think hurt bitcoin a lot.
Look at the MAIDSAFE Coin “IPO” sale. Planned for 30 days and sold out in hours. I think my initial ~1.5 cent to MAID I initially made to what it is now ~300-600% increase is saying a lot. From an investment approach it is awesome, but it does worry me from an idealist stand point. I think a monetary approach that is built with the same philosophy as the network…autonomous, little to no human dependency is optimal.
2 Likes
+1 I know we are not supposed to +1 but this is key! well said, it will be great if early adopters were believers, then get rewarded, but also spread the belief of SAFE for everyone. If I get zero return but see innovation and cures for disease etc. I will feel my job is done, regardless of me. A very valid and hard to make point.
5 Likes
Yes, probably viewed initially as a ‘greater fool’ investment like another ‘property’ - Real Estate.
Bitcoin initially, I understood to be a way of bidding for ledger space on the blockchain and not necessarily performing any utility (ala MaidSafeCoin)
That’s set to change with projects building on the utility of the underlying blockchain. As these blockchain projects kick off, the bid for Bitcoin should start to more accurately reflect the utility of the underlying network, rather than the speculative token itself and as a result becomes more price stable.
Simarlarly, fiat bids for SafeCoin whose value should reflect the utility of the network in a steady line for 10 years (when web servers become redundant) …and if the design keeps evolving, should never trend downward thereafter.
Web servers becoming redundant is interesting, when reflecting on the design of the Bitcoin network. SAFE is going to look mighty tempting for them in a couple of years if they tweak their ‘proofs’ and host the database on SAFE. Lower costs, better security…should reflect on the bid for Bitcoin also.
2 Likes
2^32 different possibilities.