I think this protocol has a flaw, in a corner case. In the seventh paragraph, PG explicitly points out that it's in the interest of duplicitous investors to de

I think this protocol has a flaw, in a corner case. In the seventh paragraph, PG explicitly points out that it's in the interest of duplicitous investors to delay commitment while retaining the ability to retroactively commit. Delay between stages 3 and 4 gives investors that power, and isn't explicit. The twelfth paragraph does address this ("both parties will usually have mobile devices... ordinarily [send messages] in person... suspicious if the other is unwilling to"). However, as it acknowledges, only USUALLY. Mobile devices get forgotten, or they run out of battery, or founders might be really crazy frugal. It seems obvious that the fix is for Step 3 to include an expiry date/time, to be agreed upon just prior to step 1. If only there were a discipline that had already studied things like this... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensus_%28computer_science%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensus_%28computer_science%2...