Quote from: Lasergun on January 08, 2017, 03:59:51 PM

Quote from: alt19 on January 08, 2017, 08:56:29 AM

ok, that is not bad,
but why not to let the community vote also on proper naming and to choose a logo (there is an old one and a new one)?
a new logo is not very bad, but IMHO people remember the old one and if you fix the old coin, the logo should be original to let the coin be recognizable as the old one, let people vote on it.

Version 0.7.5.0-gbff08fa-beta (old chain) with the old logo it is the original code. Version 0.0.7.build-g891b422 (new chain) is not a fixed the old coin, it is absolutely other code, you can check it on GitHub. The new logo was proposed by aelpop on 10-Jan-2014 at the time when a lot of people believed in 42 and connected with this coin their hopes. As to the full name, it is a reluctant measure to avoid situations like this:

Quote from: farl4web on October 12, 2016, 06:01:05 AM

Quote from: Lion87346 on October 10, 2016, 06:34:08 PM

Thanks. I'm connected. The only way this coin will ever make it is if someone creates a website for 42 and maintains it. If this doesn't happen people should just let 42 die. Because if people aren't going to take it seriously there's no need for it.

I made contact to the owner of 42Coin.org, the original domainname, and he wants to sell for $1129. That's to much for me. I offered him $150, he did not agree unfortunately.

it is clear, of course, a new chain,
what I'm trying to say:
the chain is new, the coin is old (you swap it, you convert old coins into new coins to fix an error with the total suppy, it is not a new ico nor a new mineable from scratch coin).
like if you are asked how many years old is 42-coin, what will you answer?
if you answer: it is since 2016, ok, but it's not a legend then,
if you answer: since 2014, well, it is a legend, but then why a new name and why saying it is new?
the chain is new, the coin is original... only that makes it look interesting,
domains? 42.today is available.