Quote from: arwin100 on July 07, 2022, 11:52:12 AM

Quote from: Gayong88 on July 05, 2022, 06:41:28 AM

As a bounty hunter, I will definitely be happy to receive the results of the campaigns that have been followed in this forum, but I myself am confused why the Owner always replaces the smart contract even though the token/coin is already known. what is the meaning of the tokens that have been distributed to participants, is it just for fun?

The common reason is they want to make people think that they are creating something good to their tokens and hoping for investors to see that this is good updates happen to their project.

But eventhough that's the case sometimes this is not the intention of some developers and actually we cannot hit up the main intention because as many says devs have different reason on why they implement a replacement on their smart contracts.

I believe that most of the time they are "updating" it to make it better in the code part of it. Audits are a real thing, and when you create a token with a contract that doesn't pass the audit check, then it is going to be a problem. I have seen many people who did it because they found some problems with the contract.

It is simple really, if CertiK for example says that there is something wrong with it, you update it, do a new contract, and ask them to check it again, and if it is clear then you stay with that but if there is some more then you make another one and check it again. One project I worked with literally had 3 contracts because of an issue.