At this point we should all take it as a given that 'anyone can do anything' - fork, propose stuff etc. I was incredibly explicit about that in the post you're responding to. But like BIP110, I think the idea of freezing coins here is antithetical to what Bitcoin is designed for: permissionlessness . And so I'm advocating against it, as strongly as I can. I think 'sponsor a quantum frenzy' is irrelevant here. No coins will be magically created. If there's a viable path to securing *your* coins before CRQC, that is enough, even if messy, even if inactive coins get reactivated down the line [1]. That's orthogonal to actively choosing to destroy Bitcoin's value proposition. [1] A good analogy might be: someone creates a new super-powerful gold detecting machine and suddenly a bunch of dead people who buried their gold underground in remote locations get it "reclaimed". Bad for the gold price, sure, but gold owners can't do anything because there is no all powerful 'security council' to 'delete' that gold, and they are happy about it! (Maybe in the 30s the US govt kind of did that - but that's not an example to emulate!)