The idea in Bitcoin is that anyone is free to write and release their own reference client, implementing the consensus rules, as they see fit. It is up to the users to decide whether or not to use that client. That's all that's happening here.... Free market operating perfectly. Make your choices. No drama.

Unless i'm missing something however, what you are trying to get core to adopt is not an optional toggle, but a hard size limit, where legacy or non-complient nodes cannot participate or are shunned going forward ? Thus the blocking of "spam" network wide. The wording leads me to believe that's your intention. Or would it still be optional to inscribe if you want ? It's one thing to run Knots/Ocean and gather/market support for it. It's another to frame it as a bug and push it to core as a new defacto standard. By the way, unlike the blocksize debate, this change affects proven profits by motivated network participants. Since adoption and use appear to be increasing unabated despite the "spam", are you fully cognizant of the down stream impact such a change would have ? The second order effects and blowback ?

Plot twist. I was missing something. Fix is good. View quoted note →