There's a good amount of debate on Article XV of the current constitution on the EOS main net.
A Member is automatically released from all revocable obligations under this Constitution 3 years after the last transaction signed by that Member is incorporated into the blockchain. After 3 years of inactivity an account may be put up for auction and the proceeds distributed to all Members according to the system contract provisions then in effect for such redistribution.
One of the reasons this was implemented I believe was to help prevent voter apathy and people from holding the tokens with no interest in the network itself.
I think this is a good idea based on the following reasons
Accounts that are inactive for 3 years are not voting due to vote decay, the high speed of the network and ability for new BP's to be voted in at any time means each voter should remain vigilant and keep an eye on each of the Block Producers.
As powerful as the EOS main net is and is yet to become resource wise, I still don't like the idea of old, abandoned accounts lingering like Bitcoin accounts do today with each of them taking up pieces of RAM which could has otherwise been freed.
One of the features of EOSIO is the ability to change your keypair used to administer your account. One of the features this brings is potentially Quantum resistance. It would require too much computational power and resources to successfully reverse a public key into a public key today, breaking the keypair. However, as we move forward and gain further developments into Quantum computing, this may not always be the case. Active accounts will one day update their existing keypairs to quantum resistant ones, where inactive accounts won't and will be left vulnerable.
This can put unnecessary pressure on arbitration services which may be summoned for an event that didn't need to occur had the account holder took proper care and maintenance of the account.
This article could set a good precedent for the public that the EOS main net is not to be neglected nor littered with account owners not willing to participate in the network.
I don't like the idea of distributing the tokens the account would have held, I think that also could present further administrative effort on the network and be ambiguous to the public. I'd like an explicit "tokens to be destroyed, never to be replaced nor minted" and call it done once and for all.
