Hi @trostparadox, I did not find a good time to speak in depth with you at HiveFest so I'll take the opportunity here.

First, I thought you made a great point early in your presentation about what I would call "namespacing" and what you call a "prefix." I believe BitShares has this feature and I was surprised years ago when I found that there was no such protection on our chain. I'd love to see that implemented because right now, anyone could claim an account that looks very much like it is owned/operated by another. I think that if BitShares does it, there's no reason we couldn't. Obviously we would need to do this without affecting accounts which already exist, but I think that's as simple as doing a check once at the point of account creation. Something like: does the portion of the username before the dot match an existing user? If so, an additional signature from that account's owner (or active) key is required to create the account.

I would disagree strongly, however, with any protocol changes exempting stakeholders from curation duties. Our chain already enables this use case in a few ways. The easiest, and least damaging I think, is delegation to curation projects like @curangel. This allows stakeholders to entrust a group of humans to find and upvote quality content with their stake, and still receive a high percentage of the curation rewards. The curators are, of course, paid a fair rate for this transfer of responsibility, which I think is important.