I took BIP110 on the merits of what it actually set out to do. Whatever you believe about the person who made changes nothing. Bit you went along with the diatribe that it is all about Luke. No, it is about limiting the use of bitcoin to monetary function and keeping it clean from an outcry for legitimate government intervention (regardless of they can intervene). This is one of several reasons bitcoin does not have private (zk) transactions, to keep it auditable. You yourself condoned buying only KYC bitcoin so it is "washed" by the exchange and "pristine" and not colored by illegal and immoral activity like paying hitmen or being routed through a sanctioned country. You can dismiss the problem introduced by allowing unencrypted and unlimited contiguous data chunks placed on your computer, but IMO this is the biggest danger to what core did. They called attention to it by making it worse, and Luke was the only one proposing a solution. Everyone else cried, twisted their undies, and fainted on couches claiming "we can do nothing about spam". This is not arguing in good faith, and you of all people fucking fell for it. So what do I get? This bullshit "argumentation" from the greatest marketing genius ever born leading with a stupid question "how can it ever work, asshole?". Well fuck you right back at you. This isn't about whether it works, it's about convincing people the problem exists and can be confronted, and showing everyone what they allowed to happen to their sacred " bitcoin devs" controlled by "core". Ha! "Core", that name alone should have sent up red flags. BIP110 was only addressing part of the problem. Again, you of all people should understand this, but maybe you're just too cowardly of ending up on the "wrong side of history". There are no heros in bitcoin, they all fall from glory, and I'm not in this for glory. I want to separate money from state.