Here’s a bit of game theory to consider…
These are two valid burn addresses I generated:
1MaidSafeCoinErcGooooooooooojnoRWm
1MaidSafeCoinKeepingZzzzzzzzzcrQdn
No matter what is decided for the eventual claim process for the ‘real’ network token (whether it’s burn or snapshot), and no matter who is responsible for designing or administering it (maidsafe or community multisig or some automation), there must always be some mechanism that allows the new token sender to ‘take one step back’ from an omni burn address and cater to those constituents. If burned funds were ignored it would be seen as needlessly unfair or bad design and would seriously undermine the project. We don’t need to ask to burn, we can just do it and it forces the outcome. The claim process can’t really afford to ignore it.
There’s also no good reason to ignore burn addresses since it’s mathematically certain what is a burn addresses is (any address containing MaidSafeCoin would take 11M years to brute force the private key). So it would be a really bad move for the claiming process to ignore special treatment required for burn addresses. No reason to have only two either, anyone can create their own burn address (so long as it contains MaidSafeCoin at the start it’s obviously a burn address).
Burn now does not eliminate snapshot later, so it doesn’t lock anything in. We still have all the options available that we did before the burn.
Traders who burn will lose the option to trade their omni, but they have already ‘lost’ it anyway because the CEX situation is so bad.
People who voted for erc20: if you want erc20 and dex, why not send your maidsafecoin to 1MaidSafeCoinErcGooooooooooojnoRWm right now? I’m sure there are good reasons, let’s hear them and better understand the risks we face. The more people do it the bigger the potential liquidity pool and the greater the chance of successful income from staking, right? It’s a bit of a game of chicken isn’t it… But if your omni funds are not being traded on a CEX because it’s risky, why not burn them and ‘put them to work’ in support of the erc20 campaign?
Worth noting there are 2171 unique input addresses to the bittrex cold storage wallet (from this data) with about 29M maidsafecoin voting to support CEX (from omniexplorer). As far as I know bittrex does not allow creating new deposit addresses, so this is probably 2171 unique accounts. 132 voters in the poll seems a bit weak compared to this…
So, can an Erc20 burn address get more attention than a CEX address? Nothing to lose right? The game theory seems to suggest burn is the best strategy. Will we see it?