@jlpell First up congrats on doing the work to produce this.
Secondly my response below is mostly commenting on possible issues that may need fixing in your document but also I may point out things where you have not dogmatically kept to the law of the white paper.
This sounds like there is a shortfall and only the early ones will get their exchange. I know this is trying to account for the other 23 million not included here. But maybe if you do the suggestion below you do not need to confuse it more by creating the feeling there is going to be a shortfall and people will miss out at the end.
Basically this is the same as saying the approx 10.5% SNT will be exchanged with MAID on a 1:1 basis and approx 14.5% will go to initial royalties. Why not just say this as the initial royalties distribution.
IE
An allocation of 452,552,412 SNT will be exchanged with MaidSafeCoin tokens. Tokens will be distributed to MaidSafeCoin holders in the form of an airdrop, with each MaidSafeCoin entitling the bearer to one SNT.
This represents the MAID holdings existing. This is 10.5368% of the total supply^ [explain in a foot note why 10.5368%]
…
Out of the Genesis Supply, 621,189,411 (14.4632% total supply^) SNT will be allocated to a Network Royalty Pool and distributed as Network Royalties.
This way then the true picture is given and people are not first presented with the fear they will miss out on the exchange, but see the correct picture of what is happening.
The foot note (^) can explain that oversupply caused the problem and initial royalties had to be adjusted down to 14.4632% to account for the error.
The way it is done in RFC0061A is overly complex to explain and the fact it is no different than my suggestion above excepting the perception that there is some people who will miss out at the end. This perception will not be relieved since they don’t know that section 3 represents the remaining amount.
Finally why isn’t the 2^32 tokens backed/stored on 2^32 data objects? That is 1 SNT per data object. This is supposed to be dogmatic after all.
The idea of physically destroying the coins when receipted by the network provided a fairly unique way to disconnect the purchasing algorithm from the rewards algorithm. Also the coin creation by the network is now gone.