Quote from: bananafana on February 14, 2015, 08:58:28 PM

They might do a hard fork to add fee collection, but why would they bother? They're swimming in paycoins from the hyper-inflationary stakers.

Let me quote myself from when this same discussion happened earlier.

Quote from: ab8989 on February 13, 2015, 09:26:09 AM

There is no question about need. Of cource there is none. However it tells something about the nature of people if they even in a case of absolutely no need at all, their nature does not allow them to do the honorable and right thing.

When the traditional way to destroy coins has always been sending them to an random address it is very interesting that they had some need to do something else. The only reason I think it has been done this way with the fees is that their nature is such that they are physically incapable of doing anything right. They always have a need to throw some curveball and fuck up everything in the process. This 'destruction' smells like scammers curveball to satisfy their inner need to feel clever about their scamming. No other purpose.

Quote from: bananafana on February 14, 2015, 08:58:28 PM

The other missing features? The features that are missing are never going to happen. The white paper is no longer relevant, not that it had any ideas that were both good and original in the first place.

This whole discussion was based on the premise that 'if paycoin ever takes off' and in that case there is a need to implement a lot of new features. Let us entertain ourselves just for a sake of technical discussion.

Of cource paycoin does not ever take off anywhere else than a long walk off a short pier, but in that case any discussion is totally moot. In that case the coins were destroyed already in GAWs address. So why bother with anything.