Here my first submission on an idea, it is really bad and up for discussion:
1. Every work has its own target value
2. Once a work is created, the target value gets initialized with the average final target value of the last 10 closed jobs.
3. As long as no PoW submission is made, the target value or rather the difficulty drops very quickly so that in at most 5 blocks it reaches the "least possible difficulty" (to help readjusting to changed miner population)
4. There can be only 20 unconfirmed PoW submissions in the memory pool (and in each block) at most per work.
5. The retargetting mechanism reacts quickly, per block, to adapt to a targetvalue that results in on average 10 PoW submissions per block
(…)
Thinking about it, I believe this is a better approach than mine. Maybe something like this could be an addition in case of a very long void:
- A possible way to get those benchmarks could be to observe the miners when they mine other currencies, possibly by observing other blockchains. They could sign found blocks on other blockchains in a way, that Elastic recognises them as miners that are willing to potentially mine XEL, so that Elastic could estimate its hashing power
(…)
Some general thoughts regarding the project:
At the moment, I think we have two main opinions about what the Elasic project is supposed to be:
Evil-Knievels has more of an "everything goes, no exclusion of miners" position (if I may be so bold), while mine is a little more careful and community-driven, with the reputation system and all. I'm not saying one position is better than the other, but this looks like a very basic question that needs an answer to move forward: Do we either want a reputation system or the possibility of implementing one, or do we want to keep the network open for all miners? At the moment, I think Evil-Knievels word holds the most weight here, I'd go his way and abandon my pursues of finding a working reputation system.