I support a soft fork to make the max op_return 0 bytes
I also support a soft fork to make a new witness field ("witness2?") where users are welcome to store up to 32 mb of spam per transaction
People who don't want to store this spam can just not run the new software. We learned from segwit that you can ensure backward compatibility by just not sharing the new witness data with people who don't flag their support for it.
I was confused by the technical aspects for a bit. Now I'm confused by the people who understand the technical details and oppose the change.
The core teams public relations on the subject has been terrible and I want to oppose just over that but emotional reprisal isn't a good plan.
So why make the most prunable data the most expensive place to put spam? Full archival nodes are all storing 4mb/10m either way. This reduces block size for pruned nodes assuming the arbitrary data people do go for it.
Please submit this as a BIP!
