typo: through, not though.
I think this sentence sounds better worded like this…
It was the first cryptocurrency of its kind to use proof of stake timestamping to secure decentralisation alongside proof of work, which distributed the majority of PPC.
Typo: Peercoin, not Peercoim.
Remember that we simply changed the name.
Maybe it’s better to say that BTC-e was shut down. This makes it sound like they delisted us for some reason.
Maybe put down that v0.8 RC1 was released for testing.
This is incorrect. A minter’s probability of finding a new block reaches its maximum after 90 days. After this period of time a minter’s stake reaches maturity and their chances of minting a new block are maxed out. All of these rules are put in place in order to prevent minters with high coin age from being able to hold a monopoly on the block generation process and to give others a better chance of minting.
Can we remove this part? I find it discouraging and ultimately there is no way to predict what will happen. It is true that funds are not currently used to market Peercoin while it’s development is still in need of catching up, but that won’t always be the case. Further, as we develop use cases for the chain and the number of regular users starts to increase, that will surely impact the price in some way. I don’t think we can say definitively that the answer to this is no. It also depends how many coins are owned by the individual.
I don’t have any reason to believe these addresses will change in the future, but it could always be a possibility. Maybe a better way to do this would be to link to the foundation page on the website where the addresses will always be accurate: https://peercoin.net/foundation.html
I think this still sounds like a new service started up. Again, only the name of the domain had changed. The chat service and all its history remained the same.
I mentioned this before in my last post, but this whole section here seems highly unnecessary.
I think you forgot to remove the period where you inserted the colon.
I noticed that in the interviews you bolded some of the user names for the people that are talking, but not all of them. It doesn’t look consistent because of this.
Also, I think you are missing the most important interview, Peercointalk Community Interview #2. This is the most important interview because in the beginning it’s the first time Sunny explained to us his vision of Peercoin as a backbone currency, what is called a trustless base layer today.
I feel the back of the cover would be more readable if it was not in all caps. It seems difficult to read the way it is currently presented.