I didnt claim either, but, as i understand it MMC are always there to be claimed if the value were to rise.
That's right. There was only a 1% distribution with MMC so I don't think it affected supply that much . . . . but if a large amount 50%+ was going into a general airdrop, you'd have a constant large downward price pressure as more and more users figured out how to bring their coins online and (likely) sell them.
I'm arguing for a minimal registration action on another thread, but the half-life idea works too although more code required to implement.
I don't know the answer to this, so I'll just pose the (profoundly insightful) question:
How do we create a "natural selection" process which
selects for people who will save and support and
selects against those who will grab and dump.
We already have that in these two cases:
- PTS holders have proven they will save and support.
- AGS holders have proven they will donate to a cause.
How do we structure things to select for other desirable demographic characteristics?
- The half-life idea might weed out procrastinators and skeptics
- A vesting period might weed out the impatient opportunists
- How do you select for people who will be the natural customers of each DAC?
- Can we even name the characteristics of those we do and do not want to attract?
Obviously we would rather not attract those who will quickly sell them and depress the price.
How do we create a "natural selection" process which
selects for people who will save and support and
selects against those who will grab and dump.
One way might be to have small amounts distributed to a wide range of addresses (a small fixed amount, not in proportion to the size of the address's holding on another blockchain). If the amount is small enough, most users will ignore it as it won't be worth the effort to claim and dump it . . . . by the time it is worth it, it will have a history of price increase so you'll have a better chance of users holding onto it.