<oembed><type>rich</type><version>1.0</version><title>aj wrote</title><author_name>aj (npub1ce…ketlq)</author_name><author_url>https://yabu.me/npub1cev2qfuqv5s9jm5a6yvhc8ne8cdl9mh459m5g8zz759s7pw9fayqnketlq</author_url><provider_name>njump</provider_name><provider_url>https://yabu.me</provider_url><html>The only (informed) argument I see for that position is something along the lines of &#34;this acts as an endorsement that such data storage is fine, and will encourage people to do more of it. You can observe that this effect has already happened with a large increase in op_return activity since the pr was opened, and the creation of a new &#34;op20&#34; token scheme. That endorsement will flow over to schemes that use witness data, increasing their use as well. That will make it less likely that will have non-full blocks (due to more token usage of either type) and increase the data storage requirements of non-pruned nodes due to increased witness usage&#34;&#xA;&#xA;Personally, I think the immediate observable effect is due solely to the publicity the issue has generated and will disappear when attention moves elsewhere.</html></oembed>