Quote from: Peter R on July 25, 2014, 11:06:27 PM

Quote from: cypherdoc on July 25, 2014, 05:55:07 PM

you got 1 BTC from me

Awesome! Thanks cypherdoc.

This brings us to 3.35 BTC of pledges so far ($2010). I think next week we can discuss setting up a multi-sig address to formalize this, but for now let's just review the requirements for claiming the bounty. It's important to be as clear and unambiguous as possible.

Quote

1. At least 1% of the valid claims (1% by amount AND by number) in the snapshot file (initial money supply) have been claimed.

2. The spin-off trades on a legitimate exchange (something at least as recognized as Poloniex, MintPal or Cryptsy).

3. The spin-off uses the snapshot.bin file format being developed in this thread¹.

4. At least 99.9% of bitcoin wealth in the UTXO set at the block height of the snapshot file must be claimable.

5. The spin-off may use full claim verification, simplified claim verification, or both. If simplified claim verification is used, the time-limit must be no shorter than 1 year.

6. The developer will prove he or she is the developer by producing a bitcoin-signed message that verifies to an address embedded in the header portion of the snapshot.bin file.

¹Since the snapshot.bin file format is not entirely complete, bounty seekers should keep us up to date in this thread so that the final details regarding the snapshot.bin file format can be coordinated.

I think it's implied that the spin-off must work. I believe I've covered this because it would be difficult to achieve 1% claims by value and by count if the spin-off was fundamentally broken (and hopefully it would never make it onto an exchange if that were the case).

The requirement that 1% of the claims must be claimed doesn't sound like a lot, but it would mean that 15,000 - 30,000 claimants (not necessarily unique individuals) controlling at least 130,000 BTC have taken action related to the spin-off. So 1% claimed claims would seem to imply significant interest.

The requirement that 99.9% of the wealth being claimable probably needs to be clarified. As of Block 305,303, only 99.84% of the wealth could be refactored as P2PkH. But there's probably been just enough inflation since this block to push this to 99.85% which rounds to 99.9% (unless more wealth has moved to P2SH addresses). Since we are right on the edge here, should we stick to 99.9% or make a definitive decision about spin-offs that only support type=01 (P2PkH) claims?

Perhaps an additional requirement is that the developer must not abandon the spinoff or "retire from development" but rather continue tracking the commits in the underlying forked system at least until some well defined time in the future such that other developer(s) come forward and are ready to assume the maintainer position with push-level privileges to the github repo to continue tracking the original system (i.e. Aethereum tracking Ethereum).

I heard rumors that there are now tools to auto-merge commits from the parent repo into a fork assuming no conflicts arise and automated test suites still complete with success.

P.S. I'm doubling my pledge to 2 BTC.

Cheers ...