Rethinking ENS Domain Pricing: A Crucial Conversation

[nick.eth]

@Bromhil

This trend raises concerns that our current pricing model might be too restrictive, potentially stifling innovation - and that is precisely what I am here to convey.

@Bromhil

The free market must be allowed to speak for itself, not continue to be hindered by protectionist policies of those too afraid to let go of the reigns.

You keep using emotive phrases and claiming things like “stifling” of “innovation”, but you’ve been asked repeatedly now to back these up with anything, even just an example of the “innovation” that’s not possible under the current pricing scheme, and failed to do so.

@Bromhil

My numbers may not be perfect, but there’s rationale behind them - something I seemingly cannot find from our current pricing structure.

You haven’t provided any rationale for your pricing beyond that you think it’s a good idea. When I and others pointed out that making renewals cheaper than initial registrations may encourage squatting, you failed to respond meaningfully to that either.

I’ve already expressed that I’m open to a more nuanced pricing model, but your response to that is to scaremonger about subjectivity and insist instead on an across-the-board price reduction.

I don’t think there’s anything further to be gained by engaging on this, so I won’t be replying further. If anyone else wants to seriously discuss changes to the pricing model in a more nuanced fashion, I’m happy to re-engage on that basis.

[clowes.eth]

@Bromhil

The discussion here, while intense, has highlighted what I believe to be a concerning gap between the ‘ENS DAO’ and the wider ‘ENS Community’.

But realistically it is the DAO that can make these changes so you have to persuade the DAO members…

@Bromhil

Looking at the data from ENS Summer 2022, we can observe a significant drop in long-term domain renewals. This is not a good indicator and should not be conflated with pure speculative behavior.

You note that this ‘should not be conflated with pure speculative behavior’ which is true, but I also think its worth noting that the success of ENS is not (in my opinion) in any way related to total registrations or revenue. Arguably a system with extremely high prices and an application process for entities with specific use cases could constitute a greater ‘success’. I.E. a system that only allows names to be registered by verified entities with demonstrable intention to innovate. Personally I think that the current setup gets the balance right.

[accessor.eth]

@clowes.eth

Personally, this post serves somewhat as a temperature check

I agree with this. (most of the time, temp checks end up being temp checks by proxy).

@Bromhil

It seems the same voices have dominated the DAO for years, potentially leading to a disconnect in understanding and addressing the community’s diverse needs.

That is what a DAO is for tho… the DAO is simply comprised of people ( in reference to consistent, regularly contributing members ) who were at one point in the same position as you. They, we, I felt the need to find their voice in an issue or issues persistently and to stay around and not just be a voice on the TL.

I don’t believe there is a disconnect in that sense because the DAO is essentially publicly available for anyone to come and contribute how they can. I did. You did, we all have.

@Bromhil

At what point do we let this bird out of its cage to fly?

If you think about the innovation of cellphones and all the inventions that are involved in the totality of production and all the infrastructure that comes with it; apply a timeline of those inventions over the course of total time of all cellular innovation, maybe that will provide some perspective. I will leave that perspective up to you to ponder on.