> - PR being locked, then unlocked to let someone submit ACK, then locked again This wasn't handled well, but a PR isn't a battleground for non-contributors to go in and say "NACK" in large numbers and then expect their comments to be tallied as a vote. It needed to be handled in some way. > - ppl paid to submit PR withouth disclosing it upfront This is influencer propaganda. We should be thankful that many talented people are able to collect a salary for their work. There is no ill intention – that's just something influencers want you to believe in order to make you angry. > - the focus being on miners wellbeing rather than nodes The focus is on bitcoin's well-being. Bloating the UTXO set dangerously impacts the cost of running a node, OP_RETURN avoids this cost. You may think you can avoid or reduce undesired data in the blockchain, but this is demonstrably wrong (look at the blocks you're storing). You can choose between bloating the UTXO set and not bloating the UTXO set. > - core smirking at oppostion during btc++ debate I'm sorry you found someone's demeanor offensive. That's not a technical argument. A smirk is bad, but probably not as bad as the accusations of corruption and hidden agendas that a lot of bitcoin developers face these days. This person shouldn't have smirked, but this gesture probably didn't come out of nowhere; people are upset and frustrated. > - core devs saying things like "if you don't like what we are doing just change software", instead of reassuring ppl when they express concern for what you are doing It's difficult to communicate effectively. I thought Greg Maxwell did a decent job here: nevent1qqsgsc3lfarzl6sjrnrewxxl88fme3ztewhrtf4tp5u56l7uhuxzdmcr9hwpf People are complex and difficult. When it comes to bitcoin, we need to focus on technical arguments to protect bitcoin's decentralization, and not choose our actions based on who has offended us.