In my view the best distribution method of the fund left is airdrop to all byteball holders in inverse proportion to Gbytes they have, providing they were kept for at least a month ( to avoid massive dump). The less Gbytes you have the more you get. And it has to be done in one round of airdrop. After this I expect a market will soon warm it up.
Mike works and saves, so he has 10 apples.
John doesn't care and wastes, so he has 1 apple.
Let's distribute apples. Ok Mike, you have 10, so you only get 1 for your hard work and planning. John, you only have 1, but although you're wasteful and willing to dump, you get 10 apples. Now you both have 11 (again?).
How is this fair?
The person that actually saves and believes in the system gets less because he HODLed, while the person that may even have received the same amount initially and dump some/most of it gets more?
By spendings his apples (GBytes) John stimulated demand thus pushing economy ( Byteball) forward.
By holding his apples (Gbytes) Mike did nothing for economy (Byteball).
Economy (Byteball) is stimulated by spenders but not by savers.
To get it, please, read about Keynesian model of economy.
Note:
Good thing I created 100 wallets and split up my Bytes between them (4 months ago). Based on your idea, I will be far better off than had they simply been in the same wallet. The same situation that SEMUX had for their distribution (regarding people with a smaller balance receiving the same amount as those with a larger balance (up to 1BTC on the ratio)).
That's fantasy. I don't believe that a man being of relatively sound mind could split up his Bytes between 100 wallets 4 months ago buying for this 100 PCs.
