Seems like it always has now that half of the so called "bitcoiners" have exposed themselves as shitcoiners who justify nonsense by just doing it onto of bitcoin.
When it comes to the current disagreement in bitcoin:
One side prioritizes keeping blocks lean for future nodes and the ability for the next generations to self sufficently run them.
The other side says your node doesnt matter, only "economic nodes" matter. Pruned nodes are fine, and nodes cant define what a transactions purpose should be because thats "censorship".
I write this only to say rational bitcoiners who think in the long term and value pleb nodes should speak up and make their stances known.
Saylors tweets suggest he is against bip110 (he doesnt have the balls to bluntly say anything).
Let me explain how suits and genuine plebs will never get along in regards to the bitcoin protocol.
He is a fiat suit taking on debt and payment obligations to stack sats in an approved and custodied manner.
He cares more about bitcoin price and his fiat paper markets more than the longevity of the bitcoin protocol.
The spam needs to be curtailed for the heath of this network long term and he is uncomfortable with the short term price movement of disagreements in bitcoin.
He put himself and his company in a shitty situation and he wants the spam disagreement to disappear for his own short term self interest. He doesnt care about the actual long term health of the network.