Should we accept the inactive/inexistent addresses as Stream Recipients?

[IaroslavMazur]

Personally, I'd say that as long as simple transfers to such addresses (i.e. that have no previous txs) are allowed, it'd be unfair to disallow users to stream towards them.

After all, this could be their elaborate/unusual way of "burning" the respective assets (i.e. streaming them to a random address that nobody, presumably, has access to).

@sablier-labs/sabvm, curious about your opinions

[PaulRBerg]

We should accept such streams. Why should we not?

unfair

That's not the best way to put it - it would be a terribly bad UX.

[IaroslavMazur]

Why should we not?

One reason would be to "protect" the users from accidentally streaming to the wrong address.

Although, the VM should be agnostic of such things. That is, a web3 wallet might want to warn the user before such a Stream is signed into a tx, but, again, just "warn" - and not refuse to process such a user request.

---

Seeing that we agree on the matter, I'm closing this discussion.