On one hand I see what you mean and it makes total sense, on the other it makes also sense to oppose a second step that builts on a previosuly rejected step. But most of all, if you don't acknoledge that this last change makes things different (namely that it takes away friction and exposes node operator to more legal risks) then our discussion cannot go forward, because these 2 facts is what our disagreement rests on

Replies (1)

you keep throwing in these hypotheticals though, "well but if you think that, then we have no business talking yadda yadda" 🤣 I have stated like 25 times that I despise spam and anything it entails, nor have I ever said that this new low blow to bitcoin is to be ignored. I am, and rightly so I maintain, showing perplexity at the difference in magnitude between taproot scripts, on one side, allowing for huge bloating and pollution of the blockchain, and OP_RETURN on the other, which is disgusting still, but on a much smaller scale, technically speaking.