Introducing DIP-1337

[dogeletariatdan]

DIP-1337: D3-1337 the E-1337.

[rnicoll]

The main issue with this is it presumes the large accounts are individuals. My expectation is several of them are large exchanges or wallet providers, meaning functionally this would make it impossible for those service providers to meet those commitments to their customers by chaotically redistributing people's money to themselves.

It also seems extremely unlikely to be accepted as a hard fork, given that functionally if the miners and exchanges (the most negatively affected parties) do not adopt a change, most users will not understand why they can't send/receive funds to those services any more and/or revert to the previous release.

Lastly; if the top 100 holders reacted to this by splitting their funds down across 100,000 addresses, and suddenly another 100 addresses were next in line, would that be the intended outcome?

I would suggest that instead we need encouragement for individuals to hold their own funds rather than in services, as well as encouraging services to break up cold wallets.

[dr-bonez]

Yeah the 1 address 1 person assumption is dangerous. The community fund would be easily sybil attacked by a whale splitting their funds across many addresses. They could then get more votes and redirect funds for their own interests. It effectively becomes a plutocracy, as the wealthiest would be able to split their wealth across the most addresses. I would guess that this is the opposite of the intended goal 🙃