Fabian notes that while there seems to be a similarity in the overall idea, there might be differences in the structure, particularly in how the sponsored transaction is referenced, contrasting with Rubin’s proposal which did not include an annex for referencing. He mentions that this topic had been extensively discussed in a lengthy mailing list thread back in 2022, highlighting the ongoing interest and debate within the community regarding such innovations.

Fabian encourages Martin to delineate his idea by specifically addressing how it diverges from or improves upon the previously discussed concepts, especially Rubin's. He suggests that Martin's proposal could gain more traction or be better understood if it clearly outlines what sets it apart, making it potentially a more appealing solution. This approach would not only clarify the uniqueness of Martin's proposal but also contribute to the broader discussion by building on existing knowledge and ideas within the community. The references provided by Fabian, such as the initial proposal by Jeremy Rubin and the subsequent mailing list thread (long mailing list thread in 2022), are crucial for anyone looking to understand the context and evolution of ideas surrounding transaction sponsoring within their field.