Filters are a form of censorship, because they introduce subjective judgment into an otherwise neutral protocol. The moment a group decides what qualifies as “spam,” they’re no longer just validating transactions — they’re enforcing ideology. Bitcoin was designed to be neutral. If a transaction pays the required fee and follows consensus rules, it is valid. Period. Adding filters changes that — it creates a class of “unwanted” transactions even if they are technically valid. Miners play a crucial role here — and inscriptions and ordinals have contributed a significant share of miner revenue, especially during periods of low monetary transaction volume. That’s a market signal. It proves demand, and it helps secure the network by increasing fees and hash incentive. To censor that flow — through filters or relaying policies — is not only ideological, it’s economically reckless.

Bitcoin was designed to be money. Neutrality is a mean, not an end. Does bitcoin need the massive, bloated, fiat-funded mining corporations to survive and be resilient? 1. You are free to think of it as of anyone's litter tray. But if so, what is the real purpose of bitcoin in your opinion? 2. Do you run a bitcoin node? If so, why? Or why not? 3. You say the filters do not work yet you say let's remove them and let's take away the possibility to use them from the node runners. Why? For me the censorship resistance applies solely to monetary use and we need to optimise for that to keep bitcoin working. Bitcoin is a life threat for the various fiat rent seekers and they will try to destroy it. The spam filters were introduced in 2014. It's not about introducing them now, it's about core planning to remove them completely, taking away the user's freedom to use them. OP_RETURN is not for monetary data, so no financial transaction is being filtered by it. The whole CP argument is indeed FUD but clinging on it and refusing to listen to the arguments behind it is also missing the point.

My computer is not neutral. It is mine. You're free to relay what you like. The idea that Bitcoin should somehow be neutral in all ways is an odd one. Bitcoin is money -- something that by its nature is designed to keep score. To let us see the winners and the losers. That it is even possible to upload jpeg's to the blockchain is simply a failure for developers to solve a technical problem: how to prevent it without impeding the ability to manage the monetary use of the network. As such, we can't (yet) stop the spam from getting through. But nothing says any of us needs to take part in actively assisting it in doing so.

And yes, if there does come a day where we have a proposed change to Bitcoin that prevents non-monetary transactions, I'll be in favor of it. Including a hard fork. The sooner the vandalism stops, the better.