I don't feel like it is tbh.
BIP 110 "makes no sense" because:
1. Technically Ineffective: Network dynamics ensure that a "tolerant minority" of nodes or direct miner submission can bypass any rela...
I honestly don't think your points are a faithful representation of reality:
1. Bypassing relay filters can be currently done, but BIP110 would remove this possibility since it would define more restrictive consensus rules
2. It prioritizes data embedding reduction, not necessarily spam prevention since blocking spam entirely is basically impossible. The approach of the BIP is that of removing most or all "features" which are currently unused (taproot annex anyone?) so that easy data embedding options are not available anymore. How is this hurting monetary properties?
3. See point 1: BIP110 is about consensus rules, not relay policy.
4. Not sure what to make of this point.
1. Bypassing relay filters can be currently done, but BIP110 would remove this possibility since it would define more restrictive consensus rules
2. It prioritizes data embedding reduction, not necessarily spam prevention since blocking spam entirely is basically impossible. The approach of the BIP is that of removing most or all "features" which are currently unused (taproot annex anyone?) so that easy data embedding options are not available anymore. How is this hurting monetary properties?
3. See point 1: BIP110 is about consensus rules, not relay policy.
4. Not sure what to make of this point.
🤙1