Yes, we are in full agreement on this point. I think that much of the discussion and/or disagreement on recent topics between ourselves has stemmed from certain things taken out of context at one point or another. Perhaps such is the difficulty with using a forum as the primary means of communication.
For example, consider the criticism and attack on rudimentary reasoning skills I received from @riddim and @oetyng for not presenting some basic “maths” about divisibility, reason, and scale before tossing ideas around of other more complicated or contrarian methods in the safecoin compo-cannibalism thread. What they perhaps failed to realize and took out of context was the whole premise which that thread had started from. The line of reasoning was based on what I thought was your criteria (perhaps again something inferred out of context) that scale and divisibility were rather limited resources due to network constraints; that it was a firm requirement to stay within 2^32 network objects to represent all safecoin currency regardless of the degree of divisibility chosen. It was this same criteria that led to my support for @norimi’s denominations concept since it is essentially a compression mechanism that allows one to have divisibility of similar limiting magnitude as that of 64bit addressing (meaning fixed point integers with 32bits for fractional part) but via a standard set of 2^32 objects. I was of the opinion that this fit rather elegantly with Mr. Irvine’s original description of having a total number of safecoin being no greater than 2^32, with divisibility being 1/(2^32), while also providing some additional flexibility as to the incrementation through the use of a scale factor in order to allow for rounded units such as 10^-6 SC instead of 1/(2^20) SC. This is just one possible concept in addition to the ones you have proposed, and others. The recent discussion in this forum just prior to my joining indicated that divisibility was still an open topic. I understood that to mean that your detailed proposal from nearly a year ago must have been long disregarded for some reason and the floor was open to toss some other ideas around.
As a newcomer to a project like SAFE, one attempts to digest as much information (some of which is constantly evolving) as one is able to link together from varied sources in order to “get up to speed”. In general I’ve always seen project forums as a place to try and bounce some ideas around, see what sticks, and what doesn’t. This allows for others who are more experienced to step in and help guide the knowledge transfer and identify a project’s communication styles in order to be productive, while also minimizing the echo chamber effect. It is not my intention to go off on unproductive tangents, nor do I want to, nor do I desire to try and steer the ship in any other direction than where it is already going. I can only ask that you forgive my ignorance on certain SAFE details and share links or references to information that might help me climb aboard the ship and help it move faster. Sincerely, if this is not the communication protocol for this thread/forum please let me know what is so that we can eliminate further friction and be more productive.