I am tacitly with you. Proponents of covenants however are absolutely fukn awful at explaining their case.
They don’t even seem to understand who they are trying to sell the idea to.
Bitcoin can’t be led by such people if it is to grow which we both agree it must.
“So what? Banks (pegged shitcoins, eCash, etc.) WILL print in excess of reserves. This always happens.”
This is the wrong framing entirely.
Covenants need their own positive framing, not a negative one opposed to the risks of alternatives.