I’m curious to know how the community feels about funding existing entities to add support for Z-addresses. I’m not advocating one way or the other, just writing down some thoughts.
For example: I have heard in the past that large exchanges charged a “fee” just to list a coin to cover their time/effort. What if a major exchange was willing to add Z-addresses for a fee?
Would this be something the MGRC could consider funding to “grow the Zcash ecosystem” or would it be completely out-of-scope because the MGRC has to abide by the same non-profit organization requirements as the Zcash Foundation?
Same question for popular wallets like Jaxx, Trust, Ledger, Trezor, etc… If they said they would only need a one-time fee to add Z-addresses to thier platform would it be something that should be considered for a grant?
What if the MGRC could hire a engineer/team to work with the platform, like the Zcash Foundation has done with Zondax to add Z-addresses on Ledger? I think that is the better way to go. However, what if a platform doesn’t trust/want an outside team working on thier proprietary software?
I have a few schools of thought on this one.
I don’t like the idea of the MGRC paying for a for-profit organization to add Zcash Z-address support, but I understand that they have a finite amount of time/engineering and often won’t accept outside support.
It’s a chicken and egg problem. A for-profit platform like an exchange/wallet adds support for things based on customer demand but we can’t get the customer demand for Z-addresses up because lots of platforms like exchanges/wallets don’t support Z-addresses.
What if pay-to-play is the fastest/only way (in lieu of of overwhelming demand from thier customers for Z-addresses) to get some of the major platforms to make the effort?