I have thought before about asking Sunny what he thought about adding custodial grants to Peercoin and whether he would be opposed to it. The purpose would be to prevent a takeover by a company that wants to pay Peercoin’s developers. Such a situation could alter Peercoin’s fundamentals in favor of the interests of the company that is paying the bill. I hear the same thing is happening with Bitcoin right now.
Custodial grants would allow Peercoin holders themselves to pay developers, preventing a possible takeover in the future. I believe there should probably be a limit on the amount of Peercoins that can be created with any one grant and a limit on the amount that can be created within a certain timespan, that way the amount of coins created through grants is somewhat predictable and can’t be abused. Motions would need to be added as well. Both would help strengthen the decentralized governance of Peercoin.
It may be controversial, but I believe it may be necessary to keep Peercoin in control of Peercoin holders. They would need the power to issue new coins to pay the bills. Relying on donations will only go so far. Eventually someone will step up to pay the bills, but they’ll want something in return. Custodial grants would help prevent a scenario like this from happening.