Yeah, nostr:nprofile1qqs8fl79rnpsz5x00xmvkvtd8g2u7ve2k2dr3lkfadyy4v24r4k3s4sppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnyv9kh2uewd9hj7qg7waehxw309ahx7um5wgkhqatz9emk2mrvdaexgetj9ehx2ap0sfm3mt said something about how having a supermajority running the same implementation is kind of necessary, and I disagree with that. His wanting to be able to physically remove spam on an individual level is totally right, but his consequentialist bent toward solving the spam problem, thinking it is necessary to have the same filters and software in virtually all places, is misguided, I think. It is nice, but not strictly necessary, to have a tendency toward that. So I just think his solution needs to be workshopped more by a discussion in the community as well as people just running what they think is right and having options.

A Pareto distribution of node software implementations is much better than having only 2 or 3 with 1 super dominant one. This way there are many options, and the most popular will generally be the most popular for a reason. Every node has significant, though small, influence on the network. Noderunners have agency and make choices. Let them simply choose. Mechanic seems to forget this in his pessimism. But I totally agree with him about property rights and the right to reject what we consider spam from our mempools, and the utility of doing this against the various threats out there, and having a reliable place to source spam filters if we feel we need them.