Hurry up and do a spin-off for some coin, I *really* want to see what the market decides. It will be interesting!  

I happen to think that believing SN (who invented the whole damn thing 10 years after the rest of the world had failed and given up) shouldn't get any is absurd. Believing this on the basis of "fairness" borders on clinical insanity.

About the only definition of "fairness" that excludes early bitcoin developers and adopters is the one where something is made fair by you getting more and others getting less. Come to think of it, that's probably is a pretty good working definition of what people really mean by "fairness" most of the time. I don't see it as an objectively useful concept.

Think of it this way. Imagine the US government proposed replacing "greenbacks" with "orangebacks." If they just swapped them out, one for one, there would be little to no objection, and the new currency would rapidly be widely accepted.

If, instead, they tried to come up with some new "fairer" distribution scheme for the "orangebacks" there would be a huge battle over it, and even the proposal were somehow adopted, it isn't clear whether "orangebacks" would ever be accepted.

you're exactly right.

the only way to do the distribution is to adhere to Peter's proposal of distributing the altclone in proportion to the Bitcoin blockchain on an agreed upon date in the future.  one of the main goals of this brilliant strategy is to make the entire Bitcoin community comfortable with the project by only having to focus on the potential innovation of the altclone.  and that includes Satoshi. to presume he's dead or lost all his keys is stupid.  to presume he'll dominate every market is incorrect.  he'll just have the same % of what we all have already.

we want maximum support of the Bitcoin community based on the distribution of the current blockchain.  if for say, Peter decided to take half of Satoshi's portion as a bounty for his efforts that would immediately introduce an unhappy response from some Bitcoiners who would then not support the whole concept by calling it unfair.  we want all Bitcoiners to relax and fully support the altclone and not feel threatened by it taking over.  to Peter's credit, he ignored a suggestion in my gold thread about him doing just that; taking half for himself as some kind of payment.

let's hope he adheres to that.

Create 2 identical clones with differing genesis, distribute 1 original and do the second without satoshis millions.  Which one will  be successful

Satoshi, in the privacy of his home, gets pissed off that a bunch of late adopters have decided to dilute his share of the cryptocurrency coin space.  and then he decides to start dumping his Bitcoin in retaliation.  he is human after all and he hasn't died.

none of us want that right now.

Satoshi was given no stake in any existing alt, and hes not crashed the value of bitcoin because of this fact.  Why would he crash it from any other distro method to an altcoin?  Especially if you assume the clone in question is just some vanilla no-frills clonecoin.  Why would he crash BTC then, for some other shitcoin?  Now what if it was an altcoin with new codebase and lots of features?  The new coin is superior anyways.  He crashes BTC, then the new coin takes over, was going to happen anyways. This possibility of a satoshi crash highlights a very big vulnerability in BTC in the first place.

Satoshi could become some James Bond -esque supervillian with plans on destroying the worlds economy by crashing BTC.

If you cantt do something in a decentralized currency w/o fear of 1 person crashing something like so, then its both not very secure and not a good idea in the first place (meaning BTC is not a good idea in the first place, not the altcoin or its distro method).

EditToAdd: Yeah, thats a NXT address in my signature.  Even so, counterparty has the best distro method.  It even helped out BTC holders by deflating the currency.

nothing to do with "fair".  a world with money will never be "fair".  Its about removing the risk that satoshi could crash the new coin.  face it, BTC has a vulnerability of satoshi crashing it.  You are forced to trust him not to if you want to go with BTC.  This trust should never be required in a cryptocurrency

thats a strawman.  yes we agree that the free market has already determined that they trust Satoshi and aren't afraid of him dumping his coins.  doesnt mean that it is a good idea for a cryptocurrency.  you seem to be hung on a "people keep saying its not fair" thing by your 2009 phrase.

but I do miss the point of your last 2 sentences there.  no one ever said anything about stealing anyones coins.

or are you saying that if someone did a distro method but left out satoshis public addresses that this would be "stealing" SN's altcoins?  surely not...