It looks like honeypenny is doing 21. Given that this coin is clearly superior to honeypenny on every other basis (first mover advantage, no block rewards going to the developer as free money, far better name, etc.) we should really just do 21 and remove a differentiator has the potential to hurt us. If the emissions curve matters, then honeypenny could outcompete this coin on that basis, and if it doesn't matter there is no harm in having the same curve.
With the same emissions curve we almost certainly outcompete honeypenny. They have one or two interesting features but we can easily adopt those if they turn out to be useful, since it is open source.
If you and other major holders like noodledoodle etc come forward willing to donate half of your supplies to pools, services, etc, I will be willing to do so as well.
There are more than 200k coins out there now and I doubt we can even recover 50k, but at least it'll show that the core people involved are willing to give up their share for the future of the chain. Then, we can hardfork to 2 minute blocks and diminish any possible allegation of premine.
I already pledged 10k which is half of my coins. Actually I pledged a bit over half because I figured by the time this conversation even got going I would have more.
I also think just slowing down the rewards a bit until the total drops down to the new curve is fine. Say starting at block 20k, we reduce the block reward by 1/N of difference between the actual curve and the eventual target curve where B is the block number and N is 10000-B. This provides a "sunrise" period of approximately two months during which the block reward is lower by about 2 coins until the new curve is reached. The size of the reduction can be greatly reduced if we got solid participation in the crowdfunding.
This is assuming the block time is retained at 60 seconds. I would increase it to 120 seconds, in which case the numbers needs to be adjusted, but that is a separate question.