I don't know what RDTS is?

BIP444 aka BIP110 Reverses the data storage / CSAM vulnerability added by Core30's malicious changes.

"where we were before Core30" i.e. a world where: Large op_returns were being mined anyway, helping node runners by keeping the spam out of the UTXO set, and understanding the importance of miner decentralisation - where we help the small miners (template builders, to be precise) to see the same transactions as the big miners - many of the noderunners (using many versions of Core, and some running LibreRelay) were helping decentralisation via their relaxed mempool policy. That's the world we were on then, and the world we remain in today, and the world we'll be in after you fork off. The Bitcoin Network makes its own decisions, and doesn't need permission from you - or from Bitcoin Core - when it decides to relax mempool policy in order to help noderunners and help small miners who are building their own templates

Count yourself lucky for not knowing what RTDS is. It's a proposal to change bitcoin that doesn't include any proposals to make it easier to run a node, or make bitcoin more private, or to help decentralise block templates, or to help scaling. It doesn't contain anything good It's practical effect, like Knots before it, would be to put more spam into fake pubkeys, thereby making it hard to run a node. It also increases mining centralisation

It does no such thing. There is no way to "reverse" anything without confiscation/destruction/freezing funds which is what BIP110/444 does. It contributes to centralization of consensus and mining. I'm sorry you are incapable of grasping long term game theory on this

I think they get it and are willing to lie to get their way. Think about it, they are calling it a soft fork. There is no way to have different block validation without a hard fork. Clear shameless lying hoping you are too stupid to get it.

its a soft fork because all current versions of Bitcoin remain compatible with bip110 blocks as it is using exisiting consensus rules and not adding new ones fun fact: a ursf contrary to it's name is a hard fork 🤓

Be as pedantic as you want. All it takes it 1 op return and you are a hard fork. My bet is somebody drops a time locked transaction to block 1 after the activation to force the issue.

nothing pedantic about it, bet all you want, that's not a hard fork

Uh huh. So someone posts an 81 byte op return. Core validates the block. Knots does not validate the block. There are now 2 chains. Those 2 chains can never merge or reconcile. That's not a hard fork?

nope, not a hardfork. bip110 uses existing consensus rules rather than adding new ones making it compatible with all nodes on the network nodes that enforce bip110 would not ever see the offending block as valid, making the enforcing node only ever compatible with one side of the chainsplit. nodes that dont enforce bip110 remain compatible with both , but only one side of the chainsplit carrying perpetual wipeout risk. both sides of the chainsplit ultimately cant coexist without a hard fork present a hardfork would explicitly reject bip110 blocks which would be adding a rule.

Knots will be explicitly rejecting blocks that core validates. That's 2 chains no matter how much wall of text you post.

nodes only follow one chain 🤷 2 chains is a great rapper tho

Yeah. Core nodes will follow the new longer chain tip and knots nodes will stay on the old block waiting for someone to add to it because they think that new block is invalid. The core nodes and the knots nodes will follow different chains. And when 1 chain becomes 2 chains in a way where they can never merge or reconcile it is called a hard fork. I can't tell if you are fucking with me because this is pretty basic.