The protocol I suggested above, is safe and secure and a very good compromise saving everybody without taking rough measures against people who miss deadlines. You need to take another look at and sleep on it, imo.
if something were broken it must be removed right away. you can't compromise the entire multi billion dollar worth of system just because some people might be lazy!
when people enter bitcoin world the first thing they learn is that they are now responsible and in full control of their own money. that includes keeping an eye on development of bitcoin and changing directions if needed.
Firstly, it is a good compromise, not a bad one! Being rough and harsh against people because they have missed some deadline is neither a good practice nor a part of bitcoin culture.
Removing OP_CHECKSIGHASH is too harsh. Unlike what you say, people have no obligation to keep an eye on what pool operators and devs dictate. It is not part of the code, I've bought some coins as an eternally safe asset without signing any contract to be online or keeping an eye on anything. It is basic.
I think even talking about such a hypothetical fork hurts bitcoin and should be immediately stopped! No matter who first put it this way and in what condition such nonsense ideas have been formed in his mind (or probably he has been drunk or high?) but it is not what bitcoin is.
What if pools and wallet companies and devs decided (for the
interests of their multi-billion business) to block
terrorist wallets, e.g. because of US authorities threatening the whole community?
