Now, I believe that this outlines a plan for a very "fair" cryptocurrency. In fact fairness is one of my *PRIMARY* intents in creating it. But I also believe that because it works differently from the expected model, it is very unlikely to meet any set-in-stone criterion of "fairness" based on the usual set of expectations.
Therefore I ask that whatever else you decide here the committee should remain free to exercise human judgement as to whether a new issue is fair, rather than merely interpreting narrow rules.
You have made a valid point. Each coin should be looked at on a case by case scenario. This is why FairCoin would need a combination of trusted senior members and jr members to review and vote on if the coin merits FairCoin Approval. Its clear that your development approach is sound and not just some fly by night rush scamcoin launch. Good devs can wait a day or two to let FairCoin look at the project before they launch, and use FairCoin to give their project more merit.