mimblewimble team mailing list archive

[Casey Rodarmor <casey@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 11:59 AM, Fernando Nieto <fernandonm@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Once blocks are full, even if you only burn part of the fees, what makes
> you think users will publish transactions with a fee greater than
> MIN_FEE, instead of sending a MIN_FEE transaction to a known miner and
> then splitting the rest of the fee (that would otherwise be burnt)
> between them?

I'm curious what others think of this, but to me this is a really
strong argument against burning fees.

This would incentivize every miner to run transaction accelerators,
which seems bad on a few fronts:

• Accelerators are bad for privacy, since they give miners a chance to
associate IPs with transactions

• Accelerators require a bit of extra infrastructure, which means that
miners won't be able to switch frictionlessly to and from mining Grin

• It incentivizes pooled mining, since unless will probably only
submit transactions to the top N accelerators, so if you're not in the
top N pools, you're incentivized to join one to maximize your fees