His rationale is not based on a threat to the consensus rules but on a threat to decentralisation of the bitcoin network. I'm not saying that he's right, I don't know it. I'm just saying that your framing is wrong, in my opinion.

Replies (3)

As far as I understand it: the harder, more expensive and/or more dangerous (illegal?) is to run a bitcoin node, the less people will run nodes, the more centralised the network, the more it is vulnerable. The idea is that spam is making it harder to run nodes.