Supporting it too for the same obvious reason as previous poster. Will add this to my datafeed.
Only wondered whether it is not wiser to have this amount of money spread across a number of multisig addresses?
First of all on behalf of FLOT I thank you for your support.
Multisig is tricky enough to deal with using just one address. The best way would be to use different permutations of public keys to generate multiple address; this can reduce some unlikely user errors in using Cointoolkit (fat fingers, not verifying the transactions). The security gain, though, is marginal, and comes at a cost - both the community and FLOT need to keep track of more than one address at a time, which introduces other forms of security issues.
If we use different sets of public keys altogether, this also introduces some key management issues, both by FLOT and the community, without much security gain. A lot of that is because of the overhead in agreeing upon a newly formed address (which already has to be done for every custodial grant, btw), and that nud and bitcoind don’t let you segregate private keys and choose a specific key that you use to sign a transaction (not necessarily an overall bad design in itself).
Personally I will reserve the first option as a possible solution, but it comes down to whether FLOT has the right training in doing the right thing. To address this concern, we may be able to do multiple practice runs in burning the 0.49 NBT “test balance” without touching the 20000 NBT output. @jooize@masterOfDisaster@ttutdxh@woodstockmerkle want to give it a try?
Yeah it’s not implemented yet. Let me do that quickly, though Cointoolkit may be better at doing that. To burn say 0.1 NBT from 0.49 NBT, just set the output to be 0.39 NBT and the 0.1 NBT will be gone forever.