Your post advocates a

(X) technical ( ) legislative (X) market-based ( ) vigilante

approach to solving the double-spend problem in a decentralized cryptocurrency. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may have other flaws which used to vary from state to state before a bad federal law was passed.)

(X) Scammers can easily use it to defraud users

(X) Smart contracts and other legitimate cryptocurrency uses would be affected

( ) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money

(X) It is defenseless against network-level attacks

( ) It will stop scams for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it

( ) Users of cryptocurrencies will not put up with it

( ) Microsoft will not put up with it

(X) The police will not put up with it

(X) Requires too much cooperation from exchanges

( ) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once

( ) Many cryptocurrency users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers

( ) Scammers don't care about invalid addresses in their lists

(X) Anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or business

(X) Replicated state machines do not scale

Specifically, your plan fails to account for

( ) Laws expressly prohibiting it

( ) Lack of centrally controlling authority for cryptocurrencies

( ) Open relays in foreign countries

( ) Ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all private keys

(X) Asshats

( ) Jurisdictional problems

(X) Unpopularity of weird new taxes

(X) Public reluctance to accept weird new forms of money

(X) Huge existing software investment in PoW

(X) Huge existing software investment in composable smart contracts

(X) Susceptibility of protocols other than PoW to cheap fork creation

(X) Willingness of users to install OS patches received by email

(X) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes

(X) Eternal arms race involved in all network-healing approaches

(X) Extreme profitability of scams

( ) Joe jobs and/or identity theft

(X) Technically illiterate politicians

(X) Extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with scammers

( ) Dishonesty on the part of scammers themselves

(X) Bandwidth costs that are unaffected by client filtering

(X) Bitcoin already exists

(X) Error states that require manual intervention to fix

and the following philosophical objections may also apply:

(X) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever been shown practical

( ) Any scheme based on opt-out is unacceptable

( ) Block headers should not be the subject of legislation

( ) Blacklists suck

( ) Whitelists suck

( ) Countermeasures should not involve wire fraud or credit card fraud

(X) Countermeasures should not involve sabotage of public networks

(X) Countermeasures must work if phased in gradually

( ) Sending transactions should be free

(X) Why should we have to trust you and your servers?

( ) Incompatiblity with open source or open source licenses

(X) Feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem

( ) Temporary/one-time addresses are cumbersome

( ) I don't want the government reading my cryptocurrency transactions

( ) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enough

(X) The rich should not get richer

(X) Money and finance are legal constructs, and should not be replaced by undemocratic systems

Furthermore, this is what I think about you:

(X) Sorry dude, but I don't think it would work.

( ) This is a stupid idea, and you're a stupid person for suggesting it.

( ) Nice try, assh0le! I'm going to find out where you live and burn your house down!