On Sat, May 9, 2015 at 2:43 PM, Raystonn wrote: > How about this as a happy medium default policy: Rather than select UTXOs >> based solely on age and limiting the size of the transaction, we select as >> many UTXOs as possible from as few addresses as possible, prioritizing >> which addresses to use based on the number of UTXOs it contains (more being >> preferable) and how old those UTXOs are (in order to reduce the fee)? > > If selecting older UTXOs gives higher priority for a lesser (or at least > not greater) fee, that is an incentive for a rational user to use the older > UTXOs. Such policy needs to be defended or removed. It doesn't support > privacy or a reduction in UTXOs. > Before starting this thread, I had completely forgotten that age was even a factor in determining which UTXOs to use. Frankly, I can't think of any reason why miners care how old a particular UTXO is when determining what fees to charge. I'm sure there is one, I just don't know what it is. I just tossed it in there as homage to Andreas who pointed out to me that it was still part of the selection criteria.