1. Limits don't protect nodes. Data already flows over external relays, etc. The default just exclused public relay while the same or worse data gets mined anyway. 2. True for some kinds of bloat, but OP RETURN is provably unspendable (NO UTXO GROWTH), and bounded by block size. Bandwidth/storage costs are extremely minimal compared to alternatives like witness stuffing, fake utxos, which the current policy encourages. 3. Fees don't eliminate externalities, but they do price them fairly. At least with the open relay standard, everyone can compete on equal terms. Restrictive defaults give advantage to thos with private miner access, which is WORSE for decentralization. 4. Attempts to "fix" each workaround is whack-a-mole which is a waste of time. Hacky methods will always exist as long as op return is artificially constrained. Allowing a clean prunable channel is the simplest systemic fix. 5. True but defaults should reflect what is ALREADY BEING MINED. Otherwise, honest users get excluded from public relay while well connected actors bypass the rules. This hruts fairness and openness more than it helps "health" 6. Node sovereignty comes from the ability to run your own policy cod not from one-off knobs. In practice, fragmented relay settings harm network reliability. If sovereignty matters, operators can always patch their own node. 7. Block space is scarce, yes, but OP_RETURN is the least harmful way to carry metadata: prunable, no UTXO growth, and constrained by block size + fees. Forcing data elsewhere makes the bloat worse. 8. Illegal data risk exists regardless of OP_RETURN limits — people already embed arbitrary payloads in witness data. With OP_RETURN, the channel is at least identifiable and prunable. Suppression doesn’t prevent contraband, it just drives it to less visible corners of the blockchain.