Would a Blockchain based Safecoin “Sistercoin” be a handy thing to have?

As you know, I’m not technical, but was just thinking that a sistercoin on the Master Protocol may be a handy thing to have. My reasoning is that if it might address any future issues, act as a hedge or fall back, or provide utility and there is little (nothing I can see) on the down-side, then common sense says we should do it; I just though people could suggest down-sides or why definitely won’t be needed.
Potential areas that I can foresee this could address are voting mechanism,(retains Safecoin anonymity, gives blockxhain accountability) Safecoin value hedge, alternative approach to crowd funding perhaps etc – more I’m sure.
My thinking is that when Maidsafe are Burnt for Safecoin – an equal amount of the new coin are sent back – this would seem to be the optimum and only feasible time to do this as far as I can see. This way we know an equal amount of sistercoin has been spread out amongst the original investors. The coins will be free and have no discernable value – and Omni owe us one don’t they? :smile:

Anyway, feel free to club me to death, but the equation appears to be whichever is greater – potential upsides or potential down-sides. I’d be interested to hear others views on this.


So this sistercoin would later be convertible to a blockchain coin on SAFEnet? That sounds like an interesting idea. Certainly the devs have their hands full now, so such a future SAFEnet asset wouldn’t be coming anytime soon. But, this would be a large bonus to early investors and could really help with the price as it stands now.

If there were some basic (general) specifications for this future blockchain-coin that would be really helpful. E.g. features akin to Ethereum/NXT.

I will be following this closely as it would be a major development for SAFE.

1 Like

Sir @Al_Kafir your gambling with your life and will be confronted by seals with clubs…

Sorry that I offer no input, SAFEx & smartcontracts could maybe do a lot more than we imagine right now.


OK, but Safex is a private project based on Safe Network using a Blockchain based coin…why do you think this is? I can imagine Safe smart contracts can do a lot, but can’t provide some things (auditability etc). This is also a maybe and something for the future.
So, your input actually is to suggest not doing it because Safe might do more than we imagine at some point in the furure? OK :smile:
How will global voting work, just out of interest (no idea).
The issue I have with Safex is the “buying of votes” – it is like shares in a company. More money = more say. To de- centralise consensus and democratise as much as possible, votes shouldn’t cost anything Furthermore, I would suggest the sistercoin users lose say 1 % of any coins used to vote on anything – the coins to be given away as rewards to new users and such. This way, it leads to an even spreading of the coins/vote. Should the Network grow large, then it would be a simple matter to burn all coins in exchange for 2x (or whatever) the amount of any new coin to accommodate newer members of the electorate/community.
I’m just asking how would Safe deal with global community voting instead?
Edit 2: :smile:

I’m also just considering this as a “stop gap” measure, a “safety net”, an “in case” measure to take. If none or few downsides, then it seems sensible to put in place.
Can anybody suggest reasons why not, other than that Safe will maybe provide all the functionality afforded by the sistercoin, and at some future date?
I’m also thinking there are many other use cases for another coin that we also might not have imagined yet or future issues it could address.


@Al_Kafir I remember a thread somewhere about storing the history of all transactions into SD. Essentially we can make data that we consider to be a coin, and it has a ledger attached to it.

The downsides to a omni based sistercoin is that its all on the bitcoin network and so we depend on that. The upside is that we can use today the omni protocol to make a bitcoin reinforced object with transaction history and ledger recording. There’s no reason why we can’t have that as well. But I also think that person accountability, audibility take place rather than compromising all the privacy by storing the ledger on the ‘coin’ data itself.

1 Like

Sorry, what’s SD? Is this Safe Drive?

Yes, this is along the lines that I was thinking, to avoid associating with Safecoin and compromising anonymity. So, either store to SD, or alternatively use a sistercoin.

Yes, I can see that could be a potential down side although the Network seems quite robust and we don’t need it to do much or even be a long term solution (though seems OK) - maybe just a safety net. Any issues with Blockchain would only affect sistercoin as not related to Safecoin or Safe Network, just a community giveaway coin that we know at least is one method to have community voices heard as democratically as possible without impinging on Dev or Network resources too much. It could plant an acorn to grow a form of global/community fully democratic system. :smiley:

1 Like

@Al_Kafir SD means Structured Data. It’s a form of storage in SAFE that can be updated without charge, but costs several times more for the initial PUT.