Thanks for your perspective. I have no problem at all with other opinions. I'm just one of those people who think non-transactional data should be contained and the old OP_RETURN limit should be prese...
(I think I've read all the replies by you in this [assuming my client is finding and rendering them all correctly])
You refer elsewhere to your desire for more variety of Bitcoin network clients. But that will just bring relay closer to consensus, so you better be prepared for the consequences 😀.
There will always be people (like me) who are happy to be more tolerant, such as relaying OP_RETURNs, when we believe the filters are harming the small miners. (You might think we have made the wrong judgement, but we do exist and we will take action)
Secondly, miners want to earn fees, and therefore they will connect to the nodes that give them fee-paying transactions
Therefore, the *de facto* relay policy will be the policy of the few dozen nodes that are more relaxed, if the miners connect to them.
Relay policy isn't a democracy. Relay policy isn't even controlled by the economics nodes. Relay policy is controlled by the *relaxed* nodes and the *relaxed* miners
If you have a goal to keep relay policy far from consensus, i.e. to have lots of filters, then you need to be very realistic. People like me will fight the filters, if we believe it's necessary to help the small miners, and there isn't much you can do about it
You refer elsewhere to your desire for more variety of Bitcoin network clients. But that will just bring relay closer to consensus, so you better be prepared for the consequences 😀.
There will always be people (like me) who are happy to be more tolerant, such as relaying OP_RETURNs, when we believe the filters are harming the small miners. (You might think we have made the wrong judgement, but we do exist and we will take action)
Secondly, miners want to earn fees, and therefore they will connect to the nodes that give them fee-paying transactions
Therefore, the *de facto* relay policy will be the policy of the few dozen nodes that are more relaxed, if the miners connect to them.
Relay policy isn't a democracy. Relay policy isn't even controlled by the economics nodes. Relay policy is controlled by the *relaxed* nodes and the *relaxed* miners
If you have a goal to keep relay policy far from consensus, i.e. to have lots of filters, then you need to be very realistic. People like me will fight the filters, if we believe it's necessary to help the small miners, and there isn't much you can do about it
1