In Zip Editors' NU7 ZIP Viability Assessment the ZIP Editors recommended that QEDit consider whether it would be a good idea to require issuance fees to be consumed by a ZIP 233 burn operation instead of going to ordinary fees. I’d like to expand on my (personal) rationale for this suggestion:
ZIP 230: Version 6 Transaction Format specifies that the fee for issuance will be 100x the standard marginal fee. This larger-than-normal fee is an attractive target for miners, and could incentivize the “selfish mining” strategy; deployment of selfish mining would be detrimental to the network as a whole, and as such it’s my opinion that these fees should be burned, rather than sent to miners. The presence of ZSAs in the protocol incurs ongoing maintenance and data storage costs for the network, and so in my opinion burning these fees better compensates the network as a whole than would sending the fee value to the miner who wins the race to include an issuance transaction.
Would QEDit be open to modifying the fee computation in this fashion?