Divisibility is a very popular topic on this forum to many people for multiple reasons. Off-topic questions in another thread made me decide to post some notes. I thought that we should try to consolidate the variety of ideas that are sprinkled throughout the forums and bring them here in “Safecoin divisibility” to reinforce it as the central divisibility discussion. Many of the links to the topics I covered are shown just under the original post, but they are easy to gloss over.
The summaries are brusk and not much by way of a literature review but it might help stop us from rehashing the same topics over and over. Reading this main Safecoin divisibility thread is also a treasure trove. The process of going through this in one sitting has helped clear up some things for me, and made some new connections. If this is just too much text, or if you think I wrote something in error, let me know and I’ll edit the post. Maybe these should be in their own thread, I’ll let the mods decide. The “highlighted Pros” or “highlighted Cons” tags refer to statements that were either for or against the ideas or topic introduced by the OP. The year tags are just approximate based on when a topic was initiated. Some threads concluded within the same year, but others (such as this thread) span multiple years.
If there is demand, I’ll post a similar set of notes for 2016 and 2017 in addition to this main thread as well in order to lessen the chance that people will gloss over the 313 posts that are now here. After that is done, we’ll likely need a summary of the summaries. It is interesting to see how many times similar ideas and concerns were “rediscovered”. 
**TL;DR - SafeCoin Divisibility Notes : Part 1 (~2014)
Division in SafeCoin
Summary: digipl described his distaste for binary division of safecoin and his preference for decimal division and the issue that 2^32 safecoin doesn’t allow for every living human to own at least 1SC. qi_ma described how the original conceptualization for safecoin believed it unlikely that a lot of divisibility would actually be needed (due to recycling economics?) but that the core routines allowed for any if necessary.
Subdividing safecoin
Summary: This discussed the confusion surrounding the maximum 2^248 safecoin divisions presented in the Project Safe whitepaper and dissatisfaction with binary subdivision vs. decimal subdivision.
Highlighted Pros
Increasing the total supply of SafeCoin
Summary: seneca described his dislike of large amounts of divisibility vs. higher numbers of total safecoin due to innate human difficulties for thinking in terms of fractions. He suggested moving the decimal in the first 280bits of safecoin address that was described in the whitepaper. Various drawbacks were sighted and the idea was seen as violating the ico. Other considerations were that 2^32 SC were more than sufficient for network launch due to the internal producer-network-consumer market dynamic or “recycling”. dirvine stepped in to get everybody on track, indicating that divisibility up to 2^32 was possible with the whitepaper approach, but that he agreed with seneca that fractional payments are not as psychologically satisfying. He also described that the process was unidirectional, once coins are split they will exist has unique objects and not likely to recombine but could if necessary. Although denominations were criticized by some, dyamanaka presented a wallet structure that would show the total number of safecoins and fractional safecoins owned by an individual. These were taken to be Safecoin 1SC, SafeDimes 0.10SC and SafePennies or SafeCents for 0.01SC which was further described by whiteoutmashups.
Highlighted Pros
Highlighted Cons