it is gaslighting and it matters because it's different. increasing op_return because of slipstream is just stupid for many reasons that I will not bother explaining, mempool being consistency is even worse and saying it's to give a better path for spam is also false..Network demand from who? not from node runners certainly, if we go to 2017 the network was "demanding" bigger blocks from users to miners. things change if we say listen there is a legitimate, business, use case wich is Citrea weather people like or not but we have to decide how to accommodate their need, either 1-do nothing and they will harm the network in other forms but let them be. 1b- take hostile measures if they harm the network. 2 - increase op_return for their needs with a tailor sized for them. this discussion is focused on the actual use case, instead Core lead people discussion about the sex of the angels with things like what is spam after all, do filters work and all kind of crap. it's has nothing to do with spam mitigation, or miner centralization or whatever, it's a specific, clear, and legitimate use case that no one discussed, bc Core could just say hey this is what we need to discuss, we propose op_return increase, and if most of the community was against it they would need to come up with a solution, instead core blownup op_return limit way more than it was needed when if everyone knew the why and the need they would be better informed to provide solutions.