Demand-based capped recurring fees to prevent negative-value squatting
As Vitalik implied, ENS is somewhat broken in that it sold its most valuable domains to squatters without any recurring demand based prices.
Squatters provide much negative value and often make key domain names unused & inaccessible, while large windfalls squatters earn isn’t a very useful market game.
Vitalik recommends recurring demand based pricing for domain names (e.g. pay 0.5% tax from the declared value, yearly).
The proposal is less aggressive than the Harberger Tax;
The proposal dampens the tax a holder pays after rejecting a high bid and gives 4 weeks for the holder to accept or reject.
If accepted, the new holder pays 0.5% from the price paid, or higher declared value. If the holder rejects, they pay some capped or dampened amount from this 0.5%.
MintyDAO proposes 1/10 dampening, so instead of 0.5%, just 0.05%.
If a $100M bid is rejected, the current rejecting holder pays 0.05%, or $50K/year to continue renting the domain.
If the bid is accepted, the new holder of the $100M domain buyer pays $500K/year in the form of burned MINTS he locks away. If he withdraws all of these MINTS, the fees per time are deducted, and then anyone can take the domain for for $0.
MintyDAO plan to have such decentralized domains available by November 2022.
Over 75% of revenues goes to MINTS pools, burning, and veNFT lockers.
DAO voters can pair MINTS pools with public goods & other project tokens.
Sub-domain holders can earn recurring royalties, as well, and again, over 75% goes to MINTS pools, burning, and holders.