Are these "OGs" real OGs - or just early tourists? Real OGs remember when Bitcoin had no "reference client." When Satoshi released code, people patched it, compiled it, ran what they wanted. The idea that you must run whatever 6 GitHub maintainers merge would have been laughed out of the forum. Yet here we are: - PR #32406 merged against 93 NACKs from node operators - 423 downvotes on its predecessor PR #32359 - Peter Todd admitting he opened it because "entities like Citrea are using unprunable outputs" - Jameson Lopp (Citrea investor) muting critics while defending the merge - Gloria Zhao closing one PR, merging another, all inside 52 days And the "OGs" say "this is normal development," "consensus requires 95%," "just trust the maintainers." Real OGs understand: Bitcoin is not the GitHub repo. It's not the PGP keys of Blockstream employees. It's the economic nodes enforcing rules. When maintainers override node operators to benefit VC-funded rollups (Citrea, MARA), that's capture. If your "OG" status is just "I bought in 2013 and never questioned Core," you're not an OG - you're a captive user from the first generation. Real OGs run their own code. They remember that no one gets to delete config options from `bitcoin.conf` without forking the network effect. Run Knots. Reclaim the steering wheel. Prove you're actually here for sovereignty, not nostalgia.