it's a turf war. recycling one of my breakdowns:
"filters in this context mean the OP_RETURN limit of 80 bytes that Core is removing in v30. their reasoning is that these are already consensus valid and are being mined by talking directly to miners, which encourages private mempools. the controversy is over the perceived conflict of interest because citrea would slightly benefit from a larger OP_RETURN, at least up to 140 where it's cheaper to use segwit"
citrea were already going to do a combination of witness stuffing and small OP_RETURN. they were fully ready to do this and could do it today even if the 80 byte soft limit were instead a consensus rule.
they got asked specifically to put everything in OP_RETURN instead and not do any witness stuffing, since this would be the less polluting option. they were not going to switch to the less polluting option until they were given reason to believe that it wouldn't propagate any slower than the more polluting option.
do you disagree that the knots crowd perceives citrea as a conflict of interest?
they do, but they don't know the backstory and most of them pretend to understand citrea without reading its documentation. I think most of the knots people couldn't even articulate what a zero knowledge proof even is. they literally believe citrea is just an appliance that inserts photographs directly into L1 and they also believe citrea bribed core for permission to switch it on.
yes
