It's all related. The 'ethos' of Ocean/Knots mempool policy is not a distraction. It's waving a flag, screaming and shouting at the thing you say is "what really matters". I'm hear for it. I'm thankful Mechanic/Dasher et al are raising awareness.
Discussion
It's a hard line in the sand that is technically irrelevant. Inscriptions already opened the floodgates of spam. I think team Knots is making a strategic error in fighting the last war. But they are masters of their own fate and I don't believe they will back down from this line in the sand.
They are, however, the only team in the fucking world that is making a difference where it matters most. More and different block template producers is "what really matters". Ocean is smartly positioned to apply filters at the block template producer's mempool. The only filters that could possibly matter are the filters in front of block template producers.
Core, on the other hand, is fighting a battle of self-determination. They have wanted to change OP_RETURN policy for years. In the past they backed down from this fight. Some core devs are pushing the issue because they want to be masters of their own fate. I would do the same in their position.
I don't take a side in this fight because 1) it's a stupid fight and 2) despite my technical opinions, I don't believe the core organization should have the level of status that people ascribe to it. They diminish their own esteem by engaging in this fight and I don't believe that's a bad thing.
Core devs, some by their own admission, are solving interesting technical problems. But they don't appear to be addressing the most critical challenges to the bitcoin movement.
This is not a criticism directed at core. Core is just a software project. The bitcoin community makes an error in assuming that bitcoin core stands at the highest echelon of leadership. We shouldn't be expecting core to solve all of our problems. We need to solve our own problems.
What happens when an immovable object meets an unstoppable force? So far it seems that what happens is everyone gets so engrossed in the spectacle they lose their sense of perspective. Shouting at the other side because you don't like them is net negative. Keep your eyes on the prize: freedom tech is what matters.
I agree with most everything you say, but I am baffled by these two statements...
>"They are, however, the only team in the fucking world that is making a difference where it matters most."
>"I don't take a side in this fight because 1) it's a stupid fight"
Huh? Take a side for the team that is making a difference! The decision to not take a side is sad and weak. Here's an analogy (probably not a good one, just came up with off the top of my head)...
You: "Well the climate change activists make some good points, but I see their flaws too, and scientists are divided on the topic, so I'm not going to take a side. Just let Bill Gates block the sun with clouds, it probably won't work anyway. It's a stupid fight to get involved in. The WEF are just exposing themselves, and I'm glad to see it. I'll just be quiet and mind my own business."
This is an obvious strawman of your position, but it's the only way I can think of to say, pick a side! Further the cause that matters.
OP_RETURN is irrelevant. Not a fight worth fighting.