nostr:npub160t5zfxalddaccdc7xx30sentwa5lrr3rq4rtm38x99ynf8t0vwsvzyjc9 this true?
Discussion
I kept the receipts. CKPool post on the topic: https://x.com/ckpooldev/status/1957235824451559746
Mara Pool post on the topic: https://x.com/PortlandHODL/status/1958520763083825640
You said they "noticed their blocks were getting orphaned"
But neither of those two links said their blocks were getting orphaned. They just said they were taking steps to prevent the risk of orphaning
Good point, I missed that
these seem specifically about v0.1sat/vB transactions? I don't see how a large op_return that paid huge feeds is related to that.
My hope is that the same fear of stale blocks induces miners to not mine large op_return txs
To make that fear more grounded, I hope more people filter such txs
No idea. Have been mostly on stratum side of the house. But with slipstream, I imagine this would pose a similar risk so not sure why we ignore sub 1sat/vbyte.
i think its a lazy argument considering it only focuses on one type of non-standard tx
nostr:note1h9es3yqp44a2na027v7sqqnrdy5e08g3dfljgz3txh0j8dcphqjs3j5aqc
Whack a mole!
Looks like its also wrong