This scarcity leads to it being considered a valuable asset, a situation that persists despite resets. Resets, rather than solving the problem, lead to the creation of multiple versions of Testnet and do not prevent people from ascribing value to it based on scarcity.

A suggestion by Peter Todd was mentioned, proposing the elimination of halving events altogether to ensure a continuous influx of new coins into circulation. However, this idea faced opposition due to the removal of the regular 210,000-block events, which are a staple in the system's design.

Several alternative solutions were proposed to address the issue, each aiming to alter the scarcity and value association with Testnet coins. These include doubling the supply every 210,000 blocks to create an exponential increase in coin availability, making it difficult for value to be ascribed; adjusting the subsidy by adding or subtracting one after every 210,000 blocks to create an infinite supply or a more gradual decline in new coin introductions; and modifying the halving concept to reduce the subsidy by a fraction other than half, such as nine-tenths, to maintain a geometric sequence but with a gentler decline in rewards.

These proposals highlight the challenge of balancing the need to avoid future resets and the natural human inclination to value scarcity. The conversation suggests a critical examination of potential adjustments to Testnet's structure to mitigate the reasons behind its valuation while acknowledging the likelihood of needing to plan for regular resets as people continue to attribute value to scarce digital assets.