Your reply is a more elaborated version of "using witness means hacking a tool which has a declared different scope, while OP_RETURN was originally meant for non financial data, so its contents would be considered as intentional file hosting in the first place". To which I can point out that also OP_FALSE in taproot is reserved for non-financial, non-scripting data, so that is somewhat the same as OP_RETURN in scope, and it's been going on for years already. Regarding the rest, nothing to object but still doesn't address OP_RETURN in a way that sets it ontologically apart from what has been going on since 2023.