The bowl and spoon don’t make it cereal. The ingredients do. You’re describing consumption, not definition. According to your spam definition, who measures whether data storage is prioritized over value transfer? An inscription pays fees for block space. That IS value transfer to miners. If someone pays $50 for a dickbutt, they’re transferring $50 in value. You think it’s stupid. The economic transfer is real. On existing filters, block size and script size are objective structural limits. They don’t judge transaction content or intent. This transaction is too big is measurable. This transaction has the wrong purpose requires human judgment. Show me how to objectively measure data storage priority versus value transfer priority without judging intent. Priority is subjective. Bytes and fees are not.