I agree PoK could become a threat to the IDGeek business model (depending on how extensively it is applied), but @alexander, @alexeychirkov and the team that built the app definitely knew that it violates one of the central tenets of the ICP governance model and that DFINITY was interested in “exploring ideas on how to make it more difficult to transfer neurons”. Below is the original post when IDGeek was introduced and a quick browse through the comments will reveal that everything we are discussing today was also discussed in a similar way back in April 2023. In fact, there have been public discussions about neuron transfer and marketplaces as far back as mid 2021 (for example here, here, and here) just after genesis and I’m quite certain that it was well known to many prior to that timeframe since at genesis so many restrictions were already in place within the IC codebase that deters and prevents neuron transfer.
The GeekFactory team has built some amazing tools and they are an important part of the ICP ecosystem. I appreciate that they pushed the boundaries when they brought IDGeek to the market. However, this is really not a good example for how how changes implemented by the NNS could make a developers project useless. It’s not like the GeekFactory team didn’t know that they were pushing the boundaries and that changes could occur in the future that threatens the business model for IDGeek. They pushed forward knowing the risk.