I am a regular worshipper in a Pagan Sex Cult.

The history of Life on earth is about 3650 Million years long, which is a decent metaphorical year, placing the invention of sex 500 Million years ago about 50 "days" before the end of the year. That's why, every year, we celebrate the Invention of Sex with a Big Bang party (okay, we're also celebrating the birth of the universe itself) on November 11.  Hey, it's a great party.  Y'all should come!  

We just got reeally sick of the doom 'n' gloom and death and end-of-the-world stuff, and it occurred to us that a life cult was way better than a death cult.  All our lives we'd been asked to believe that someone *good* was planning to destroy the whole world and kill everybody, and that if you were good he wouldn't torture you forever afterwards.  Cognitive dissonance eventually caught up.  Clearly, it was no more nor less than our religious duty to find a new direction.  

So, as the saying goes, y'all do whatever trips your trigger.  But I know what I'm doing, and I'm much happier about it than I was before we started on a new direction.

$411.2 USD/BTC
1C7hWrfhyv31BZA13B16pTXCuWRM1uT6Ny

In order to become anything worthwhile now, an altcoin needs fundamental new ideas and new capabilities.  

I don't see very many going that direction.  

This is a good start.  I think you've hit a real sweet spot with this and I hope all the miners take it up.

Without shutting anyone down, It puts just a bit of pressure on everyone to find ways to make it easier and simpler to use new addresses every time. 

And the pressure is adjustable; as it gets easier to do the right thing, it's easy to "dial up" the number of blocks between reuses making the wrong thing ever just a little bit less tenable. 

One problem though is 'perverse incentives' for miners in the form of transaction fees.  In est, the more miners deploy this patch, the greater the additional revenue enjoyed by the miner who does *not* deploy this patch.  This is because the miner who does not deploy the patch will be picking up tx fees from tx left "on the ground" by miners who have deployed it. 

As yet, I have never reused an address.  I intend not to.  I wish my client made it easier to be sure.

As others have said, this is a bad idea and an attack on the fungibility of Bitcoin.  

However, it brings up what I think is an even more important issue that ought to be addressed.

The Bitcoin foundation, which pays for and to some extent directs the development of the client and protocol, is manifestly failing to represent the interests and needs of Bitcoin's users.

The Bitcoin foundation consists of people who have paid money into a fund that pays for things, and is now paying for things that the users of Bitcoin would rather not have.  As individuals they have the right to spend their own money as they choose; the fact that their decisions are impacting the broader community is a side effect of what they're choosing to spend their money on and the fact that the Bitcoin Community is "accepting" their donations to the maintenance and development of the software.  

The word "accepting" is quotated here because the community of bitcoin users is at this time voiceless in all ways that matter; if we don't choose to pay for and direct the maintenance and development of the software, then those who maintain and develop the software do not have any motive to obey our wishes and we are not represented.
In a functioning democracy, people direct by voting and pay for the implementation of their collective directions by paying taxes.  In the absence of taxation and voting of any kind, the Bitcoin Community as such has abdicated the direction and implementation of its own future.  We are voiceless and if someone like the foundation chooses to "speak for us" we have no means that matters of contradicting them.  We may choose a different path for the future of the software, but the fact remains that the foundation is paying Gavin to develop its vision, not ours.

This is the systemic problem which results in proposals like this one, which are clearly foolish and against the interests of the Bitcoin Community even though they may be in the interests of the members of the Bitcoin Foundation.

Therefore I believe that we *as a community* need a mechanism for directing the future of bitcoin, which includes paying for exactly those agenda items that the community votes for.  This being the age of electronic communications, we can implement a direct decentralized argentocracy (a one-coin-one-vote system, as opposed to democracy which would be a one-person-one-vote system) with no persons holding any political office.  

Cryddit

Man, what are we gonna do when we run out of railroad engines?

I suggest your idea of "failing miserably" is far far different from mine. 

Also, Bitcoin is drastically simpler than the Internet itself.  It's easier to control.  It might take them a dozen years or so, but if they decide to do it they will get it done.

I really don't want to know what these guys are doing....

Heh.  I like my answer better.