Yeah, this is pretty much my take as well. Something smells. I had always been in the camp that inscriptions are stupid; but, if they're willing to pay for the blockspace, so be it. But now, I just want node client software diversity in order to limit the influence any one of them has over the network as a whole.
Discussion
100% bro. I always had that position about inscription bs. I just ignored it.
When nostr:nprofile1qqs8fl79rnpsz5x00xmvkvtd8g2u7ve2k2dr3lkfadyy4v24r4k3s4spz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduhsz8nhwden5te0dehhxarj94c82c3wwajkcmr0wfjx2u3wdejhgtcysa20h pointed out that core devs had blocked him for questioning op_return, I immediately started paying attention. I listened to hours of online debate and I’m sorry but the core devs argument is questionable at best.
I'm wondering if it's possible or feasible to remove a core dev from the "team" - I get that they're all over the place and just commit to git, but surely there's something we can do. I don't really care if they're genuinely bad actors or just incredibly insensitive people - if the result is changes that the community objects to, then there must be some mechanism to... lock them out, stop their funding, whatever, idk.
If that's the case, is somebody from Core (in your opinion) attempting to make BTC centralized? I've read bits and bobs of the Core/Knots arguments, and I personally don't care about that garbage to begin with, because it's minuscule to what happened in 2017 with the blocksize war.
