No one is adding censorship. Are you that braindead?

Being able to reject/deny blocks because it includes data is a form of censorship. Either all transactions must be treated blindly, and equally, or else we can arbitrarily pick, and choose who gets to use the Bitcoin network.

Rejecting spam on Bitcoin MONETARY network is not censorship. Bitcoin is Permissionless Freedom Money. NOT permissionless spam dump. No need to be that braindead. I haven't seen you invite inscriptions to Monero. Clown.

This is 80 GB of spam and the trend is up. Are you that braindead?

OP_Return isn’t spam. It’s additional information associated with a transaction, do some people manipulate that data for various intended purposes sure. But they paid for their space on the blockchain, the miners were paid fairly. If you don’t want to host it, either prune your node, don’t run a Bitcoin node, or hard fork Bitcoin. Ordinals, are down from its ATH. It’s like removing the ability to assign mortgage contracts, stock certificates, or treasury bonds to its holders, sometimes transactions need additional complex transaction information to engage in the transaction. OP_Return is purely a financial transaction because even Visa transact it sends encrypted tokens, date, time, location, etc. information.

That's how a computer works. Your firewall is rejecting data that it doesn't want. Everything you store on your computer is being filtered by your parameters. This is not new and it's not censorship. Even by your metric, you're filtering out Bitcoin transactions from a Monero chain. Filters are in place "censoring" data all the time. It's just you draw the line further.

Bitcoin is Freedom Money NOT jpeg spam dump. This you?

Let me show you what bad actors look like.

If Bitcoiners want to add Their Blockchain Data to Monero, I see no problem as long as they pay the fees to do so.

If Ordinals, Inscriptions and all spam moves to Monero, I see no problem at all. Do it.

You literally cannot add a bare pub key to Monero. It will be rejected by consensus.

Monero already fixed the problem by reducing Tx_Extra information. This would be the equivalent to reducing OP_Return limits. But the difference is Bitcoin is a Database, Monero is a Monetary System. If People want to inscribe into the Blockchain they should be able to, as Satoshi also inscribed into The Blockchain himself. Ethereum is the Data version of Bitcoin, Monero is The Monetary version of Bitcoin, Bitcoin was the prototype.

Agree your rules on your own node isn't censorship (censorship requires preventing other parties from doing what they want with each other on their own nodes/interactions), but you can add bare pubkeys in tx extra. Isn't part of the issue that started the whole BIP110 vs Core the changes to the default relay policy? Kind of what Monero users have been saying forever, in a broader sense, that defaults matter a lot (and downplayed by many bitcoin maxis when it comes to privacy). A little self-reflection seems due from both sides.

Really the issue is the segwit "upgrade" that fundamentally changed Bitcoin and made the fee market just for show. Defaults don't matter that much, if you care, you change it. The problem is Core broke several things such as data carrier inpust in taproot, and the datacarriersize variable. And made THOSE defaults unchangeable (deprecation). The thing I hate the most is this shit is democrats and republicans in Bitcoin and no one seems to call it out. Real problem: Weight units measurement breaks the fee market. Democrats: fees will price the spam out, lets give them a safe place to put the data. Republicans: lets restrict freedom everywhere so that the bad guys can't spam (they still can). Me an Anarchist: Remove the witness discount and make OP_RETURN non standard again. (Removing perverse incentives and letting the market decide).