so, it isn't helpful that it prioritises actual monetary use of the chain?

every new block brings the possibility that any transaction will go further back in the queue, because people who want their monetary transactions prioritised, they raise their fee rates and non-monetary transactions then get pushed back (along with all low fee transactions). this is turning the tables because recent history has been that nonmonetary transactions have caused massive spikes in fee rates. with filters on, this is now suffered more by spammers.

you really don't seem to get that delaying spam is still better than doing nothing.

also, like way too many people, you don't understand that the p2p network is a loose consensus as well, and if you aren't participating in defining it, you are allowing those who are more determined to dictate the p2p network traffic patterns.

saying that you shouldn't use a filter because it doesn't *completely* stop spam is like saying you shouldn't wear a seatbelt when driving a racing car because it doesn't *completely* stop you dying in a crash. this is absurd. of course you can't *completely* stop anything bad. but you can slow it down, you can make it more expensive, and you can just not take away user's ability to set policies that do this.