From: skybuckflying@gmail.com   
      
   An oppertunity exists for you, were you can create a more fair cryptocoin   
   system, however it will take 2 hours and 20 minutes of your time to view the   
   video about it, or perhaps you can skip through some parts of it, or perhaps   
   you can grasp the core    
   concept of this new blockchain idea:   
      
   Youtube video link where I discuss one out of two of bitcoin's main problems:   
      
   Problem 1: Coin distribution problem   
      
   Problem 2: Scalability problem.   
      
   I discuss problem 1:   
      
   https://youtu.be/QNKMpxZ2um0   
      
   So far the basic idea is to use "signed hashes" instead of "most powerfull   
   hashes".   
      
   And the new/additional consensus rules that I have come up with so far are:   
      
   Basically I term/call/coin this new system: "Skybuck's Signed Hash Blockchain   
   system"   
      
   Going to paste this text as it was described in the video above, maybe later I   
   will work on it some more,   
      
   right now I am looking for feedback and critique if you think this system will   
   work, or if you spot flaws and weaknesses in it ?!   
      
   PEER CONSENSUS RULES:   
      
   PEER CONSENSUS RULE 1. THE IP THRESHOLD RULE WITHIN A 10 MINUTE TIME FRAME.   
      
   PEERS WILL ONLY ACCEPT NEW BLOCKS WITHIN A 10 MINUTE TIME FRAME/PERIOD, WHERE   
   THE BLOCK   
   WITH THE LOWEST IP ABOVE THE IP THRESHOLD WINS.   
      
      
   PEER CONSENSUS RULE 2. THE LONGEST BLOCKCHAIN WINS.   
      
   THE LONGEST BLOCKCHAIN WINS/IS SELECTED AS THE MOST VALID BLOCKCHAIN.   
      
      
   PEER CONSENSUS RULE 3. IF MULTIPLE DIFFERENT BLOCKS ARE DETECTED FROM A SINGLE   
   PEER   
   THEN THESE BLOCKS AND THE PEER IS DISQUALIFIED AND THE IP THRESHOLD IS   
   INCREMENTED + 1.   
      
      
   PEER CONSENSUS RULE 4. DISQUALIFICATIONS SHOULD BE BROADCASTED THROUGHOUT THE   
   NETWORK,   
      
   BASICALLY THESE WOULD BE THE MULTIPLE BLOCKS. PEERS (GROUP A) THAT IGNORED   
   THESE   
      
   DISQUALIFICATIONS SHOULD INFORM THE PEERS (GROUP B) (<-THAT HAVE DISQUALIFIED   
   THESE BLOCKS OR   
      
   THESE PEERS) THAT THEY (GROUP A)(THE PEERS THAT IGNORED THESE DI   
   QUALIFICAGIONS) DISAGREE AND   
      
   WILL CONTINUE WORKING ON A SPECIFIC CHAIN AND IT WOULD BE VERY BENEFICIAL TO   
   INFORM (GROUP B)   
      
   OF WHICH BLOCK OUT OF THESE MULTI BLOCKS THEY SELECTED, SO THAT AT LEAST   
   (GROUP A) CAN KEEP   
      
   THAT CHAIN IN THEIR MEMORY OR MAYBE THIS CAN BE DONE LATER.   
      
      
   PEER CONSENSUS RULE 5. IN CASE OF THE DETECTION/DETERMINATION OF DISQUALIFIED   
   BLOCKS, WAIT   
      
   UNTIL IP THRESHOLD+1 (BASICALLY EITHER DISQUALIFIED BLOCK IP THRESHOLD +1) OR   
   MAIN IP   
      
   THRESHOLD WHICH EVER IS HIGHER. IF THE PEER DECIDES TO DISQUALIFY THESE BLOCKS   
   THE PEER SHOULD   
      
   MARK ITSELF AS DISQUALIFCATION-RE-SYNC-NEEDED.   
      
      
   PEER CONSENSUS RULES 6. IF THE DISQUALIFICATION-RE-SYNC-NEEDED FLAG IS SET   
   THEN ON   
      
   INCREMENTATION OF THE IP THRESHOLD THE PEER SHOULD RE-SYNC ITSELF WITH OTHER   
   PEERS THAT MAY   
      
   HAVE ACCEPTED THESE MULTI BLOCKS AND ASK THESE PEERS WHAT THEY NOW BELIEVE IS   
   THE LONGEST   
      
   CHAIN...   
      
   MAYBE +1 IS A LITTLE BIT EARLY... BECAUSE THERE COULD BE MANY SPLITS ACROSS   
   THE PEERS, MAYBE   
      
   THIS RE-SYNC THRESHOLD NEEDS TO BE SET A LITTLE BIT HIGHER LIKE +5 OR +6 OR   
   +10.   
      
   THIS COULD BE CUSTOM SET AND REALLY LONG TERM IS NOT THAT MUCH OF A PROBLEM.   
      
   SO THERE MAY HAVE TO BE A PROTOCOL WHICH ALLOWS PEERS TO ASK ANOTHER PEER:   
   WHICH BLOCK DID YOU ACCEPT AT A CERTAIN IP THRESHOLD, OR ANOTHER IDEA COULD BE:   
   WHICH BLOCK DID YOU ACCEPT FOR BLOCK NUMBER X, X BEING THE BLOCK NUMBER WHICH   
   WAS DISPUTED AND   
   MARKED AS DISQUALIFIED. GOOOD.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)