Arguments For and Against ASICs and an Algo Fork

I've consolidated much of the discussion from ⁠Discord, Reddit, and Twitter into a list of For/Against ASICs. This is a living list, but I think it's good to have a reference for discussion.

Primary Goal of Ravencoin:
On-chain Asset Tokenization and Transfer

For ASIC (Don’t fork to change algo):

1. Increased capital investment, interest, and awareness for Ravencoin
2. Potential to co-exist with GPU mining (similar to ETH before going PoS)
3. Grow the demographic of miners (possibly)
4. GPU mining has already centralized by mining pools
5. GPU miners are more transient, difficult for publicly traded companies to tokenize on Ravencoin
6. Reputable ASIC partner brings credibility for other companies to start using Ravencoin for RWA.
7. When other projects got ASICs, it helped the project (See 7 below)

Against ASIC (Fork to change algo):

1. One centralized producer of ASICs creates a vulnerability
2. Larger total amount of miners when people can use consumer GPUs (possibly)
3. The whitepaper says ASIC resistance is important for decentralization
4. Thriving community of GPU miners will be less profitable
5. We already forked once to stop ASICs, there is precedence
6. ASIC resistance is a differentiating factor of Ravencoin from other PoW/PoS projects
7. When other projects got ASICs, it hurt the project (See 7 above)

Miscellaneous Comments:

1. Main chain assets are not explicitly tied to GPU or ASIC mining
2. “F*ck anybody who thinks…” is not an argument, it’s a feeling you have