I'm talking about what he meant by "official" and you latching on to that word, ignoring the rest of his point. Core, as the current and original reference client, should retain a reasonable default limit on op_return. Care to respond to that or just argue semantics some more?
Login to reply
Replies (1)
I’m not arguing semantics, it matters.
I and many others have explained this already, many times, including in the video this thread is a response to. I recommend watching it.
You can also read the article I myself wrote about this a month ago, in particular the “Bitcoin Core perspective” of course:
Or read what the Bitcoin Core developers wrote about it themselves:
If you prefer that I explain it to you again that’s also ok, but then I’ll start charging for my time. Shoot me a DM in that case!

Bitcoin Magazine
Bitcoin Core Or Bitcoin Knots: What The OP_RETURN Debate Is Actually About
The OP_RETURN debate splits Bitcoin users: Bitcoin Core 30.0 supports bigger OP_RETURNs, while Bitcoin Knots pushes back, fearing spam, rising fees...
Bitcoin Core
Bitcoin Core development and transaction relay policy
Bitcoin Core development and transaction relay policy