On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Christophe Biocca <christophe.biocca@gmail.com> wrote:
1. This provides a very strong incentive to always vote for
reallocating a block if it isn't yours
 
If everyone votes to reallocate everyone elses blocks all the time, then you'd end up losing your own coins too, so this doesn't seem like a workable strategy. 
 
    a) Requiring supermajorities
    c) Burning, rather than reallocating, the coins. Miners' immediate
incentive to attack honest pools is much reduced.

I'm OK with burning actually. The total amount of coins in the system essentially defines its maximum price resolution. Ideally we'd not lose resolution, but it's less important than having a system that does actually work. Moreover, this sort of system is like double spending defence itself - if it does work, it doesn't need to actually be done very frequently because people know the safeguards work and don't try. So in practice total loss of resolution should be limited.
 
2. BitUndo gets paid using additional txouts in the double-spend
transaction, no by miner's fees.

Right. It's indeed an assumption that block rewards matter to miners, even the ones that have double spend revenues.