What you mean is that there should be exclusivity to some naming combinations. Right now I can make a bunch of qed.accounts but the distinction in naming means nothing as its still within the name parameters allotted by the protocol. So new names would need to be longer in general or the addition to the name wouldn't be part of the name itself but some other field, which is more plausible.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Yes. For 3-letter prefixes and suffixes, since those are already allowed, there could be some confusion. Moving to exclude them in the future in order to offer them to new tribes might not be worth it due to that potential confusion.
I first thought of this when I created a new tribe and token (VYB) and started creating accounts for special purposes, all using
vyb.as a prefix. Then I noticed someone posting with an official-sounding account using the prefix. That’s when it occurred to me there could be real utility in acquiring exclusivity for that 3-letter prefix and/or suffix.For example, I could use
vyb.xxxxxfor all official accounts and let anyone create ahivename.vybaccount after they prove they controlhivename.Providing exclusive access to 1- and 2-letter suffixes and prefixes would be easy, because they are already excluded. We would just need to provide a mechanism for purchasing those rights and tying the account-creation rights for a given suffix or prefix to a given account.