Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
What should we do with egregious examples of squatted channels? I'm going to call this individual out since it's clearly squatting — @0xg — is sitting on a bunch of city channels and not actively building communities: /denver /la /losangeles /nyc /newyorkcity /newyork /sanfrancisco (Also the multiple variations of city names with no activity is clear squatting and when there are active communities in /los-angeles /sf /new-york.) A few other thoughts: 1. We have a no squatting policy for fnames and we allow ENS for a name that isn't governed by that policy. 2. We never advertised channels as something you buy and own forever. Has been centralized and experimental since we allowed anyone to create a channel last December. 3. I'm sympathetic to someone who is good faith trying to build a community, but that's not squatting. 4. Squatting is squishy, know it when you see, not deterministic. 5. Ultimately, squatters are massive negative externality on the network. It's parasitic, anti-social behavior.
39 replies
3 recasts
176 reactions
Chinmay 🕹️🍿
@chinmay.eth
Refund in full, if Warpcast can take the financial hit. It's easier accounting that way. Put the channel back in the general domain. Also, I'll be giving up my /product-hunt channel. I don't use it and it's open for anyone who wants to take over.
1 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
> Refund in full, if Warpcast can take the financial hit. It's not a financial hit and any channel fees ultimately belong to the protocol. It's more the principle that they got to squat for free. There is a cost to squatting / not actively using the channel. Externalized to the protocol.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction