Ethereum [ETH]<\/span><\/a> co-founder Vitalik Buterin and <\/span>Ethereum Name Service [ENS]<\/span><\/a> developers are at loggerheads due to the newly proposed pricing arrangements. On 9 September, Vitalik <\/span>published<\/span><\/a> a post via his ENS website, asking if the domains should follow a recurring pricing structure.<\/span><\/p>\n According to him, ENS domains are very cheap as the cost to maintain a five-word one was at most $5. While highlighting the property rights, and efficient market challenges, Vitalik mentioned that an increased price structure could offer a solution. Additionally, he mentioned the possibility of\u00a0 using the revenue generated to fund the ENS Decentralized Autonomous Organization (ENSDAO).<\/span><\/p>\n In response to the ETH founder\u2019s proposal, ENS developers seemed to be on an opposite site of the page. First, it was Nick Johnson pointing out some flaws in the proposal. <\/span><\/p>\n The developer <\/span>noted<\/span><\/a> that Vitalik\u2019s piece was thoughtful. However, he argued that there were some design constraints, as well as the externalities of the naming system. Also, the idea behind paying more for a name may be untempting. Johnson said,<\/span><\/p>\n \u201cThe people hurt by a change in ownership may not be the same people who get paid for the name. The value of a name to a third-party does not necessarily correspond to the profit gained by its current owner owning it.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n Interestingly, Johnson was not the only one opposed to Vitalik\u2019s idea. Another ENS developer, Jeff Lau also shared Johnson\u2019s opinion. She cited that Vitalik focused too much on funding rather than user accessibility in his proposal.<\/span><\/p>\n On V’s idea of using bids as an input, it *feels* quite complicated to me. It would require a cryptopunks-style onchain bid\/ask system. And it would probably mean 10s of thousands of bids being posted on-chain.<\/p>\n \u2014 jefflau.eth (@_jefflau) September 9, 2022<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n For ENS, it was a case of being unperturbed by the happenings. In fact, it looked like a worse case for the token price as it chose the downward trend rather than follow the crypto market recovery in the last 24 hours.<\/span><\/p>\n Based on CoinMarketCap\u2019s report, ENS had <\/span>lost<\/span><\/a> 4.86% of its previous day value at press time. Besides, its 24-hour volume had also dwindled in the same period according to the on-chain platform, Santiment. While it was $132.85 million on 9 September, the records at press time <\/span>showed<\/span><\/a> the volume at $117.71 million.<\/span><\/p>\n Source: Santiment<\/p>\n<\/div>\n This decrease in volume also expands to domain registrations. Despite <\/span>hitting <\/span><\/a>two million registrations less than a month after reaching one million,\u00a0 more sign-ups have failed to reach impeccable numbers. <\/span><\/p>\nIt\u2019s a no-no<\/strong><\/h3>\n
\n
\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/statics.ambcrypto.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/ENS-volume-1.png\")
<\/a><\/p>\n