The point of running a node is to enforce consensus rules and verify no one had broken them.
It doesn't work the same for policy rules, so "enforcing policy to support your beliefs" is delusional.
Login to reply
Replies (5)
i don't want to support policies that i don't believe in though. im forming consensus with keeping op_return smaller.
Bitcoin’s sole intent.
Keep your eye on the ball.
yeah, knots supporters often frame spam filtering as a moral crusade, appealing to purity and emotion rather than bitcoin's technical consensus on censorship resistance.
this ties into the ongoing core vs knots debate, where policy enforcement gets treated like dogma.
bitcoin magazine
View quoted note →
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...
That's like saying social mores have no impact on how people behave in a society, only laws do. Obviously wrong to anyone who spends a few seconds thinking about it honestly.
Filters work.
They have kept OP_RETURN clean and let data under 83 Bytes.
Core devs who lied us that filters do not work are compromised.
Especially the ones who used inscriptions as excuse which they themselves intentionally allowed.
Bitcoin Knots is keeping Bitcoin Freedom Money clean of spam, jpegs and csam.
opreturn stats for last month, you might be able to spot the previous default limit. What do you think October will look like?
View quoted note →