It is somewhat tragic to read the accusation that proponents of #BIP110 are all paid shills—though it remains unclear by whom. It seems unimaginable, in the godless fiat world of those making such accusations, that someone could act without fiat incentives. Have they never heard of doing something simply because it is the right thing to do?

Concerning the OP_RETURN policy, CoreV30+ is in the minority. Tyrannical core tried to force their spam policy on the community. This clearly shows that the argument was turned upside down: they accuse the guardians of the network of what they themselves did in the first place—attacking the network. Therefore, keep running #Knots with #BIP110 enabled.

Accusing the #BIP110 movement of lacking conviction because legitimate transactions will ultimately outprice spam is simply turning the argument upside down. Waiting and hoping that the problem will go away somehow is just superstition, as it could get worse and we end up with an unusable chain. Therefore, the community has to show proof of work to clean up the mess by running #Knots with #BIP110.

The carnage among the dependent sinfluencers almost seems greater than that in the price. We will note who fought among our lines and ignore them after the activation of #BIP110. They will not get away with it; bitcoiners do not like cowards or opportunists. Their high time preference—prioritizing short-term stability to avoid obstructing present sponsors—will not pay off in the long run.

#BIP110 could activate smoothly, but exactly those people who basically hate spam and yet at the same time hesitate to support it because of fear that a chain split may occur make it likely that a temporary chain split may actually happen. This behavior basically leads to a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Rejecting #BIP110 among external advocates spreading bitcoin adoption in Africa and other regions is equivalent to proposing a new form of neocolonialism, because lowering the ability of communities there to run nodes makes them dependent once again on the most developed countries, which will run and control the nodes instead.

View quoted note → Only in the logic of retard bitcoin without shit can result in a new shitcoin. #BIP110

You can do whatever you want in your spare time, but writing science fiction novels weakens your qualification as an expert in the economics of decentralized money based on cryptography.

Would @Simon Dixon dissect bitcoin with the same thoroughness as he analyzes world affairs if it fails, or would he express any sadness as well?

Bitcoin does not stay decentralized and secure by itself. Human action keeps it that way. #BIP110 cc: @Jeff Booth, @knutsvanholm

As bitcoin is described as "A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System" in the whitepaper, returning back to a cash system by activating #BIP110 cannot be labeled as a precedent for future restrictions. That is just another example of politically motivated doublespeak.