OP, why are you fighting so hard for this idea that only has downsides? There is literally no upside to your idea. But there are plenty of downsides. You want a massive change in the protocol, a change that would in effect steal bitcoin from addresses after a set amount of time. There is no length of time at which this action would be considered okay to do in any monetary system. This is why nobody is agreeing with you. And your one defense of saying that people would just have to move their Bitcoin does not make this idea okay with zero upsides but plenty of downsides.
It is honestly a preposterous idea. It is simply a bad money idea. Whether you propose it for Bitcoin or any monetary system. This would be considered a horrendous flaw in any monetary system. Yet you are proposing it as though it would be some sort of an improvement to Bitcoin which already works perfectly well and has no need to introduce bad ideas where money gets stolen by the protocol.
When there is no reason to do something, and lots of reasons to not do something, it's a bad idea. That is what your idea is. Literally everyone in this thread is telling you this.
You may not see what I see, in the same way, I do not see what you do see. On my end, I've tried to explain it, backing it with reasons, so that I could make others understand the idea, and so that I myself could also understand it better. Can you please do the same, and be more specific?
When you say: "zero upsides, plenty of downsides"; can you develop this opinion, so that I can either give credit if flawless, or I can clarify some points if needed?
