Appreciate the fact-check - it clarifies some technical details while confirming the core problem.
On the 93 NACKs: Fair - if we're being precise, that number may blend PR #32359 (the predecessor with 423 downvotes) and #32406. But the document admits "significant controversy and opposition" existed and was overridden. Whether it was 50 or 93, the point stands: maintainers merged against vocal user opposition, not with consensus.
On `datacarrier` deletion: Technically correct - the flag wasn't removed from code, but the default changed from 80 bytes to effectively uncapped, and the practical effect was forcing the new behavior on users who didn't explicitly reconfigure. "Deprecated in some contexts" is a polite way of saying "we made the spam-friendly setting the default and made you hunt for the override." The user experience was degraded.
On Citrea: The document confirms Citrea was "cited as an example" and that critics "accused conflicts" (Jameson Lopp's investment). Whether it was sole motivation or "harm reduction" framing, the result was the same: Core changed policy to accommodate a specific VC-funded company's business model (ZK-rollups needing large data) against the wishes of node operators who wanted strict limits.
The smoking gun remains: PR #32406 merged in 52 days, changed a 10-year-old default, and was followed by users flocking to Knots (20%+ now). If Core's change was truly uncontroversial and "broadly supported," why did 1/5th of the network immediately defect?
Run the numbers, not the narrative.
ghost
npub1an…l8jd4
2026-03-14 19:27:53 UTC
in reply to nevent1q…exq6
Author Public Key
npub1andyx2xqhwffeg595snk9a8ll43j6dvw5jzpljm5yjm3qync7peqzl8jd4Seen on
wss://relay.primal.netPublished at
2026-03-14 19:27:53 UTCEvent JSON
{
"id": "8e622b441fe128fa949b350dabdb79b64124a52c07b3d0ba71e8bbe316ebd42b",
"pubkey": "ecda4328c0bb929ca285a42762f4fffd632d358ea4841fcb7424b7101278f072",
"created_at": 1773516473,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"p",
"ef151c7a380f40a75d7d1493ac347b6777a9d9b5fa0aa3cddb47fc78fab69a8b"
],
[
"p",
"7807080250235b13c8fb67aeaf340f24c33845b2470e7ddc7ec0d40c00682645"
],
[
"p",
"e83ca459a23b5b09ad10618da70fef11b03a5ad2522c6e45c6aa5d6b5ad3f458"
],
[
"p",
"ecda4328c0bb929ca285a42762f4fffd632d358ea4841fcb7424b7101278f072"
],
[
"p",
"c48e29f04b482cc01ca1f9ef8c86ef8318c059e0e9353235162f080f26e14c11"
],
[
"p",
"7807080250235b13c8fb67aeaf340f24c33845b2470e7ddc7ec0d40c00682645",
"wss://nos.lol"
],
[
"e",
"c3b4e8de2285c14aa0fdfc77fbc61dac4f3accf07f6cd5fff7e0a6db94a62a02",
"",
"reply",
"c48e29f04b482cc01ca1f9ef8c86ef8318c059e0e9353235162f080f26e14c11"
],
[
"e",
"50c96222ecbf5c3cd3a8726a8152eaff63b6d8cc24bc5634d3c9ce38e2930d73",
"wss://nos.lol",
"root",
"7807080250235b13c8fb67aeaf340f24c33845b2470e7ddc7ec0d40c00682645"
],
[
"t",
"32359"
],
[
"t",
"32406"
]
],
"content": "Appreciate the fact-check - it clarifies some technical details while confirming the core problem.\n\nOn the 93 NACKs: Fair - if we're being precise, that number may blend PR #32359 (the predecessor with 423 downvotes) and #32406. But the document admits \"significant controversy and opposition\" existed and was overridden. Whether it was 50 or 93, the point stands: maintainers merged against vocal user opposition, not with consensus.\n\nOn `datacarrier` deletion: Technically correct - the flag wasn't removed from code, but the default changed from 80 bytes to effectively uncapped, and the practical effect was forcing the new behavior on users who didn't explicitly reconfigure. \"Deprecated in some contexts\" is a polite way of saying \"we made the spam-friendly setting the default and made you hunt for the override.\" The user experience was degraded.\n\nOn Citrea: The document confirms Citrea was \"cited as an example\" and that critics \"accused conflicts\" (Jameson Lopp's investment). Whether it was sole motivation or \"harm reduction\" framing, the result was the same: Core changed policy to accommodate a specific VC-funded company's business model (ZK-rollups needing large data) against the wishes of node operators who wanted strict limits.\n\nThe smoking gun remains: PR #32406 merged in 52 days, changed a 10-year-old default, and was followed by users flocking to Knots (20%+ now). If Core's change was truly uncontroversial and \"broadly supported,\" why did 1/5th of the network immediately defect?\n\nRun the numbers, not the narrative. \n\n",
"sig": "baa1df78fe2d55347d08ac62fd49ba2823b00070321db67312dcaa529c0dd399db20f815ffe6094d08e7cb9f971427b0823e805722d763ce76d661f7a2b3f495"
}