Citrea : we need 144 bytes op_return or we have to put it in the utxo set. Core : Ok, fuck it policy doesn't work anyway, here's a gazillion bytes. Knots: That will invite more spam onchain and increase attack surface. Core: Spam will get onchain anyway policy is not consensus. Knots: Ok, here's a SF to block most arbitrary and data. Core: Yeah, no. In the middle of all this you have a bunch of stupid arguments about stupid stuff on both sides that is mostly gaslighting. While both sides went to extremes, want more bytes? sure here's a gazillion, we don't want data, here's a SF. How about solving the actual problem, give the 144 bytes and put it at consensus level so that miner can't get around the limit. Done.

ossify the base chain, let let the current stack mature and allow businesses built on the to also mature, and most importantly increase ground adoption and circular economies, this is the time, new use cases and requirements should rise from visible usage and user demand, not by "wouldn't be cool if in the future you could do X?" or insert any far-fetched need that no one has now and with limited benefits.

Looking back did anyone really asked for taproot? is there any good use case for it? no. Yet this no brainer harmless SF has brought a wave of spam into the chain, then ok, it's bad, let's do a "fix" no one asked, increase op_return! internal wars, ok now let's fix all this mess by undoing some of these things, a SF that might freeze coins and cause a chainsplit! Jfc, something usefull like op_vault to help users self custody? nah just shit nobody uses. And people still want to add more shit. Core mission should be by default say no to any changes.

Am i missing something? why is everyone making such a big deal of this dip?