What's wrong with just putting the original specification and name at launch back like every other legitimate coin? That is factual, let people draw there own conclusions. If changes to the key specifications are made they should be added to the OP with an explanation of when those changes were made, not erased.
People will always draw their own conclusions. The amendment format you propose is only really suitable for programmers, who are used to reading changesets and revision logs all day. Besides, if it only lists spec changes, it wouldn't (explicitly) mention the instamine either. A dedicated page is much more useable IMO, and the exact contents and wording are a separate issue.
It is suitable for investors who have a reasonable expectation of some sort of detailed specification and full disclosure about what it is they are buying (prospectus). Putting it on a another page is perhaps okay if unconventional. It still raises questions about
why it is being hidden. No need to answer, you've already explained your perspective of why, but it still raises the question.