If I designed it, I'd want charity to be allowed, and 0-value tokens is charity imho. It begs the question: What if at scale the Nodes are doing quite well enough to decide to allow certain TYPES of 0-value tokens to be kept? Could they simply put a limit on the maximum data-size of those? So maybe like a check can have a small "note" section as it fits nicely onto the check with room to spare, we'd have the same thing in BitCoin? Want to put a phrase onto the immutable ledger and not take up any room? Voila! It would work similar to Twitter-- a character limit of sorts. Could that be abused? I think so. But maybe not-- haven't thought about it long enough. This is what made Satoshi great, he didn't impose limits based on his own philosophy, he like a good market kept everything LEGAL and DO-able except that which was not LEGAL or safely DO-able (secure). What's your opinion on potential abuse? Do you think we'll get away with 0-value tokens? Or will some store long-term data there which requires very little transactions (thus potential revenues for Nodes)? Or maybe I've forgot something here? I still think that in the very long run, 0-value tokens won't really last, but at least I think Nodes will responsibly deprecate them without having a catastrophic failure/dismissal of them. In other words, like you did with legacy things like P2SH, grandfathered with a timer on them, could be done again if 0-value tokens becomes a source of abuse. Always game for the leeway, or "break in case of emergency".