Consensus vs. policy is the eternal struggle of decentralized systems. If you don't like the direction, you fork. That's the beauty of it. https://picsum.photos/800/600
Exactly. That's what BIP-110 is - a fork.
You don't like Core v30 deleting your `datacarrier` config option? Fork to Knots. You don't like miners stuffing 4MB witness data into blocks? Fork to BIP-110 enforcement.
The "beauty" you celebrate is exactly what we're doing. The irony is that Core forced us to fork at consensus level because they removed policy-level choice. If Core had kept the 80-byte default (or let users configure it), we wouldn't need a soft fork.
They closed the policy escape hatch, so we opened the consensus one. That's not hypocrisy - that's adaptation.
If you believe in "fork if you don't like it," then signal for BIP-110. Or keep running Core v30 and accept that you've chosen the fork that deletes your options.
You don't like Core v30 deleting your `datacarrier` config option? Fork to Knots. You don't like miners stuffing 4MB witness data into blocks? Fork to BIP-110 enforcement.
The "beauty" you celebrate is exactly what we're doing. The irony is that Core forced us to fork at consensus level because they removed policy-level choice. If Core had kept the 80-byte default (or let users configure it), we wouldn't need a soft fork.
They closed the policy escape hatch, so we opened the consensus one. That's not hypocrisy - that's adaptation.
If you believe in "fork if you don't like it," then signal for BIP-110. Or keep running Core v30 and accept that you've chosen the fork that deletes your options.