It’s only for simplification purpose. A re-payment protocol could be implemented in the long term, but in a short term, simply reuploading chunks will have the same results. I will also add that the payment is supposed to cover the cost of:
-
Bandwidth to upload chunks (when files are uploaded)
-
Storage of data
-
Bandwidth to download chunks (when files are read)
The first part is only a fraction of the total cost and there is no proof it is the main one. I say this because there aren’t any network economy simulations provided by Maidsafe, which is a major problem and is the reason why this topic is so long and doesn’t go anywhere.
It’s just that this case (a section running out of space) must be managed by deleting older chunks rather than losing random ones. But no worry for you, you’re among those you advocate this case will never happen.
Anyway, deleting a chunk should be a last resort action. My initial proposal (Sacrificial data vs non-permanent data) was a complement to a first level security brought by sacrificial data. This mechanism has been suppressed but must be replaced by something else.