Source
r/loopringorg•
Foolprooft

Would it be difficult to implement a "return to sender" protocol in the wallet?

Discussion

A highdea came to mind when i was scrolling through my wallet transactions.

I was participating in an NFT giveaway and some random dude sent me 100 nfts of this dumb gif. Wasnt my style, didnt ask for it, so i sent it back. All good there.

But I got thinkin. When inevitably this wallet becomes mainstream, theres a lot of potential for people to be mean. When you think about us redditors, we are a small group of people, who all have in common that we are first adopters. We are nice to each other. But when everyone has a crypto wallet, truth of the matter is there will be not so nice people.

Imagine this scenario. Some little kid who just got his wallet at 10, and he gives his crypto address to his friends. Some bully finds his wallet name, and relentlessly sends him naughty nfts. Seriously. As lame as it sounds, it could happen.

So I just had this idea that it would be really cool to set cetain wallets to "return to sender". Block them. Simple and safe.

What are your thoughts?

Posted Jul 5, 2022, 4:30 AM UTC · edited

4316
HereForTheEdge•

Need a spam folder.

It may end up a fair bit like managing email. Mark as junk, block sender etc.

12
Bostonparis•

Could work and I would imagine would be super easy to implement. The only thing that sucks is you're stuck with the gas fee, when returning to the sender (even though the gas fee is pennies). It would be nice if there was something implemented in the protocol where people that did this got strikes. And after enough strikes they have to pay the gas fee when someone else is returning their spam. I could see some flaws in my idea. But overall I think the send back would be a nice option to have.

9
TryAgn747•

Return to sender where the gas fee gets charged to sender would solve the spam problem real quick .

7
Ok-Information-6722•

Or straight up a black list for banning specific addresses from sending you stuff, avoiding the need to return to sender.

5
FoolprooftOP•

Well yeah, same functionality, just didnt believe cancelling a transaction would work.

2
smileyphase•

We can send NFTs we don’t want to the dead ETH address. It would be nice to be able to sort or hide stuff, but the wallet isn’t really a place to showcase a collection.

As a developer, my wallet is now loaded with tons of NFTs I don’t want, but can’t be arsed to get rid of, even at a minor cost.

Return to sender stuff is more at a smart contract transaction level, I’d think, so… marketplace. We’re doing direct wallet transactions, and for decentralized crypto those should be unidirectional.

1
FoolprooftOP•

Wait, so theres a dead eth address?

3
[deleted]•

[removed]

1
[deleted]•

[removed]

1
[deleted]•

[removed]

1
[deleted]•

[removed]

1
Exceedingly•

0x000000000000000000000000000000000000dEaD

It's worth $1.5B presumably from people sending little bits of coins here and there. This is assumed to be not owned by anyone as it's never sent coins out, only ever in. Would be hilarious if one day someone logs onto it and cashes out as a billionaire though.

1
FoolprooftOP•

Oh thats fucking hilarious. Thats such a simple workaround i would almost think i came up with it.

"Ill just send all this bullshit to that guy and make it his problem"

1
Pushbrown•

ya but doesn't sending to the dead eth address still cost gas fees?

2
smileyphase•

Yup. But LR layer 2 fees. Which I can’t be arsed to spend to get rid of some NFTs.

2
[deleted]•

[removed]

1