BIP-99: Replace placeholder with relevant link for Inflatacoin fork #1844

1. 
   torrpriius commented at 4:41 pm on April 30, 2025: none

   This PR resolves a remaining TODO in BIP-99 by replacing the placeholder [non_proportional_inflatacoin_fork] with a direct reference to a historical Bitcointalk discussion about the proposed Inflatacoin fork.

   Changes

   • Replaced:
     [non_proportional_inflatacoin_fork] TODO missing link

   with:

   [3] Discussion on consequences of forks and schisms: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=563972.0

2. Update bip-0099.mediawiki 80a554ab29
3. in bip-0099.mediawiki:347 in 80a554ab29 outdated

   343@@ -344,7 +344,7 @@ worth of blocks).
   344 
   345 [2] https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0050.mediawiki
   346 
   347-[non_proportional_inflatacoin_fork] TODO missing link
   348+[non_proportional_inflatacoin_fork] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=563972.msg6176525#msg6176525
   

   ---

   ---

   

   jonatack commented at 5:33 pm on May 3, 2025:

   I’m not sure about this link; it doesn’t seem directly relevant?

   0One possible result observed in the past[non_proportional_inflatacoin_fork]
   1is that one of the chains rapidly disappears, but nothing indicates
   2that this must always be the case.
   

4. 
   jonatack commented at 5:36 pm on May 3, 2025: member

   Unsure about the proposed link. It might be more useful to either fix the footnotes formatting so that they work, or remove them.
5. Update bip-0099.mediawiki ab7ee01217
6. 
   torrpriius commented at 1:23 pm on May 5, 2025: none

   @jonatack I’ve updated the footnote formatting to match the rest of the document. The placeholder [non_proportional_inflatacoin_fork] has been replaced with a numbered reference [3], and all in-text mentions have been aligned accordingly. The link now points to a relevant Bitcointalk discussion that illustrates the concept of a “schism hardfork” described in that section.

Contributors
torrpriius jonatack