Discussion thread on Article XV - Termination of Agreement

An issue has been opened on Github about Article XV.

This thread aims to collect opinion on what we want to achieve with this article, and potentially choose language that best supports the shared intent.

We want to:

  • Have a way for the community to reclaim or invalidate any kind of asset that belongs to an EOS account.
  • Make sure inactive accounts don't consume too much system resources.
  • Ensure there is a way for users to protect from their assets being reclaimed or destroyed due to inactivity.

I will edit this post in case we agree on any other goals or specific language.


  • lapapanitelapapanite Posts: 2 Brand New

    Thank you for starting this pertinent initiative, it will help gather the motivations of each - side in favor and against article XV and find a new formulation which could better serve both objectives.
    I agree with the 3 points you've list there.

  • mv3830mv3830 Posts: 1 Brand New

    Article XV struck me as unnecessary and possibly very damaging. If an identity wishes to remain dormant for 3 years due to security or other concerns, that is their prerogative. Others should not seize their assets until they have done harm to the community. If a threshold is needed for network maintenance, it should be closer to 10 years. IMO.

  • Ch3loo19Ch3loo19 Posts: 2 Brand New

    This is a question, not a challenge, but how is it a realistic consideration that dormant accounts will consume (non-immaterial) system resources? If by definition the accounts are dormant and not generating transactions, is their existence not easier by comparison, to accommodate?

Sign In or Register to comment.