rich1.0drgo (npub1fa…nthnd)https://yabu.me/npub1fa8c9prxnrlkdtjl48adfsxyaduz8tas075l2n4f6903y9awjmxqanthndnjumphttps://yabu.meI look forward to seeing this. I feel the whole core knots thing to be overblown and based on some really bad reasoning mixed with poor technical understanding…but I still want to be on the knots side, but I can’t be if there isn’t a “there” there… I’m not convinced having relay policies more restrictive that consensus rules is a good thing for bitcoin users. I think there’s a good argument that forcing extra mining centralization by forcing spammers to pay the big pools to mine their OP_RETURN spam is actually very bad for bitcoin (because nobody would pay a small pool to include their spam, it takes longer). And OP_RETURN isn’t the only way to spam…it’s just the least harmful way to do it. Spammers have found a cheaper and more damaging way to spam and those transactions get relayed by knots and core…at least with OP_RETURN those don’t affect the UTXO set, which is best stored in RAM… Either way, all spam does is bring the future forward. And I don’t think the future is bleak. Data size isn’t a major resource concern, blocks are already capped in terms of data size. At the end of the day, I don’t think knots will find a way to censor transactions and i don’t think it will matter whether or not blocks are full now or later…eventually they’ll be full.