Great point. It reminds me of this statement from dirvine
If people can’t make a basic cost / benefit statement on the attack they propose (not necessarily an analysis, just a simple acknowledgement) it almost certainly isn’t well thought out. I understand costs and benefits are not concrete, but they matter a lot in this network.
“I can attack the network” needs to be met with “at how much cost” and “what will you do once it happens”.
I find attacks on the network extremely interesting, but mainly because they aren’t feasible.