rich1.0Super Testnet (npub1yx…c399s)https://yabu.me/npub1yxp7j36cfqws7yj0hkfu2mx25308u4zua6ud22zglxp98ayhh96s8c399snjumphttps://yabu.meUsing unspendable utxos to store spam costs a couple of bucks more than using an op_return. The deterrent effect of raising the cost in this way outweighs the cost of storing unspendable utxos, in my opinion. True, unprunable spam is a worse kind, but you have to be quite motivated to do it thanks to its higher cost of production, and the result us much less spam overall. I think that's a good thing, it highlights the filters' deterrent effect. But if we remove that, the effect reverses: we get less "unprunable" spam (yay!), but at the cost of having way more prunable spam, and that seems worse to me.