Good question.

In Bitcoin message signing, the signer doesn’t submit their public key explicitly. During verification, the public key can be recovered from the signature and hashed to check that it matches the provided address.

So the link comes from public key recovery during verification, not from the signer publishing their public key.

When you put money on a candidate, you’re expressing a belief that they will win.

When you submit a signed message, you’re expressing a preference for who you want to win.

Those are two completely different signals. Both are valid, but they answer different questions.

And just to clarify, a signed message does not require you to reveal your public key.

True, a pseudo-identity can be created infinitely.

What can’t be created infinitely is the Bitcoin behind it. That’s the part that can’t be faked, and the part that creates the constraint.

So the signature isn’t the signal by itself. The economic weight attached to it is what makes the difference.

That risk is real, yes.

But without KYC, a signature only proves that “a holder exists”, not who the holder is.

A bad actor would still need some separate doxxing vector to connect a signature with a physical identity.

So the safety question seems less about the signature itself, and more about whatever personal exposure already existed.

These signatures have no legal force, so there’s no need for KYC. But the potential selling pressure they represent is very real.

A signature isn’t the cost. What it reveals is the holder’s preference, and the cost appears when reality moves against that preference.

Imagine two candidates , A supports light bulbs, B supports candles. A light-bulb manufacturer holds a meaningful amount of Bitcoin. If they sign a message supporting A, the signature itself carries no cost. The real cost is that their savings are now exposed to the future they’re signaling for.

If the world shifts in a direction that harms their industry, their Bitcoin position could be pressured into selling, or lose purchasing power in ways they cannot ignore.

And depending on how widely Bitcoin is held across the population, this kind of signal may influence voters to very different degrees.

Haha all good, and honestly, thanks for still remembering.

Thanks for letting us know! The website seems to be working for others. Could you try the following steps? 1.Clear your browser cache or try a different browser. 2.Check your internet connection or switch to a different network. 3.Try accessing the site from another device.

Is the webpage not displaying, or are you unable to submit the signature?

Definitely:)

Nope, they can participate too.

I thought the goal of Bitcoin was to become a peer-to-peer electronic cash system

We are calculating the total amount of Bitcoin.

Definitely better than war.