Which vibes? The filters don't cause forks whereas Ver deliberately went towards forking Bitcoin from the get-go. The proposed filters (I think we're talking PR #28408 here?) discourage 'spammy' behavior by applying arbitrary data stored in witness data to the same datacarrier rules as OP_Return. It's not even a new rule, it's an existing one

Maybe I'm not entirely familiar with fixthefilters, but those who wish to normalize arbitrary data on Bitcoin are closer to advocating for a fork because arbitrary data on Bitcoin has ALWAYS and should continue to be discouraged. (note: yet remain always possible) Nodes engaging in discouraged behavior are who causes the forks, the filters don't do that; Nodes running filters ultimately validates spammy blocks just fine too The filters just nudges the network to discourage spammy behavior one node at a time.(the network at present is one that encourages spam 😅).

At present (v26) there is no set of configurations to give users control on whether or not to relay transactions witness data containing arbitrary data because the txs completely bypass datacarrier checks. Users are without the ability to make the decision for themselves whether or not to relay these sort of datacarrier-in-witness transactions.

I agree that Users ultimately should build implementation like Core on their own. (Applying the patch is great homework assignment to do as the drama plays out.)

However as you undoubtedly understand, that's a journey down the road for those aiming to achieve further sovereign usage, hard to nudge the network in any direction relying on only them. In the meantime, shouldn't giving more users better control and responsibility over how they wish to interact with the network, a good thing? (As opposed to no control)

Some feel that the filters are futile, bad actors will always discover ways to circumvent them. Maybe the fears and concerns over an endless cat and mouse game over arbitrary data are legitimate, but does anyone truly believe the game around arbitrary data stopped at OP_RETURN? Bitcoin is software, a part of it could run better by fixing something that was overlooked, why is fixing it controversial? Isn't it only contentious to those who prefers a network that encourages spam? Aren't they the ones giving off the Ver fork-vibes?