Thanks for the feedback and letting me know that my earlier emails fell victim to spam.

My scheme might be better because it would add further incentives for running full nodes.  A full node can be run on even a cheap laptop.  In my experience, once a person new to bitcoin accepts it as at worthy of attention, the next area of interest is how to mine.  They'll learn about mining pools, search, and if they are technical enough, they'll join the pool and likely be disappointed with their results.  They'll then consider a graphics card, or ASICs, or just stop mining altogether.  And I wouldn't be surprised if, when making that selection of a mining pool, a person might, based on limited information, decide that the best mining pool to join is the largest.  

I've made a number of assumptions in that progression to further my point, but I don't think that journey is too far off mark.  I do so to illustrate that for a person to enjoy some financial reward for running a full node, in practice, it isn't as simple as running a full node .  My proposal makes it easier for a full node to enjoy rewards, and to do so on modest hardware.  In that sense, it is better than what we have now.

Many people new to bitcoin express an interest in mining.  I suspect that the primary motive that they want a way to earn bitcoin using the computer ** that they have **.  If you too believe this, then I hope you'd agree that my proposal offers a solution that meets the desires of that person new to bitcoin.  It makes bitcoin more accommodating, which makes it better, but this time on a "social" rather than technological scale.  This would help ** keep ** people interested in bitcoin and result in ecosystem growth.

With a larger ecosystem running full nodes, the blockchain becomes more secure.  That's better.

Then there are the merits of "enodorsement" itself which is at the heart of my new scheme which one might argue could raise the bar from 51% to 101% to pull off such an attack.

I don't know that my scheme helps on the sybil front, but since it requires and builds on top of the current system, I don't know that is makes it any worse.

I tried to be more crisp, but that's one of the areas I need to improve.

Thanks

-Chris