Thanks for sharing your perspective. To clarify the distinction: the network doesn’t run code to detect a node’s "intent". An economic node is simply defined as a node whose owner acts as a final economic destination (processing actual commerce, merchant payments, custody, or exchange deposits) rather than just relaying traffic.

If non-mining nodes reject a block, it doesn't matter to miners unless those nodes represent real economic velocity. A miner's incentive isn't to satisfy the total count of listening nodes, but to produce blocks accepted by the entities holding actual buying power and paying for block space.

BIP-110's rules are technically backwards-compatible as a soft fork, but if major exchanges, custodians, and payment processors reject the tightening, miners who enforce BIP-110 risk producing blocks that the real economic backbone refuses to settle.

That’s why node count doesn't dictate consensus, economic consensus does. The fact I need to explain this to you means you don't understand BTC or consensus at all. I suggest learning about bit more about how it all works before personally attacking someone vs. their ideas in the future.

Enjoy the 8th, I will be in a boat fishing in the ocean and won't care what happens. The outcome is already known.