Wouldn’t intentionally obfuscating these incentive payments be suspect? Especially if the motive is to prevent the user from making the choice that we acknowledge they would likely make if fully informed?
Would we expect lots of large advertising focused entities to set up claim accounts and drive traffic through advertisements (Google AdSense, Media[.]net, PropellerAds, etc?) There would be no accountability on the messaging that ENS is subsidizing through these hidden incentives.
@AvsA’s transparent model mitigates some of this, but even that might not be received well when users see that they’re funding web2 advertising companies.
Final thought - any 3rd party is free to build a value add layer on top of the existing ENS registration system and charge whatever fee they wish.
The ENS DAO could instead continue to focus on encouraging these value add layers that incorporate ENS registration into other business models that would ultimately be more additive to the user experience. Rainbow is a fantastic example.