Quote from: Evil-Knievel on September 28, 2016, 12:01:42 AM

Quote

I still think taxed hashes are an ok solution. I know it has disadvantages, but I think those are small enough to consider it.

I also kinda like the idea of taxed hashes when implemented right (e.g. using actual time spans instead of block heights to specify a time frame where solutions have to be revealed) ;-) But I also fully trust HunterMinerCrafter when he says that this is not the correct way to go ... he has proven to me that he has a much better eye for the "big picture" than I have.

I am eager to dive deeper into a discussion why the current (and any other) approaches discussed so far are bad, and how we could possibly come to a satisfying solution Wink

Sorry that I have been offline today, I will be online the entire day tomorrow.

Well, maybe we have to settle for the least incorrect way at some point Wink

I agree though, that HunterMinerCrafter (as well as you, for that matter) has proven his expertise enough to have the last word on whether or not taxed hashes are the way to go or not.

Quote from: HunterMinerCrafter on September 26, 2016, 06:09:54 PM

()

It seems like this could leave a lot of miners unhappy when their deposits aren't returned because of "natural" cause. (Like a sudden run of "by chance" rapidly forged blocks which do not include their reveal tx, but runs out their "x blocks" counter.)

Ok, here is another "just putting it out there so that it's out there, and I don't expect anybody to take it even remotely seriously" idea, but you could also, instead of taxing hashes, implement Decreds PoS lottery system: when you submit a hash, you buy a PoS ticket with the XEL submitted (obviously, in a system, where there are no new coins mined, putting out a relevant amount of coins for an unknown period of time, just to scoop some tx fees is not exactly exciting).
Nice that we talked about it Tongue