Sorry but that’s not true at all. The consensus rules are actually consequential to the operation of the network. Ordinals are not.

There is nothing but social agreement holding up the “ownership” of an ordinal. If the small group who used them decided it didn’t matter, then there’s literally nothing consequential about the claim. They can literally only point at something in the blockchain and then state that they own it, without any power or control over that piece of data in any way.

However, millions of people could claim that I don’t own my bitcoin, with tons of social “authority.” But none of it will alter the fact that my key is still the only thing that is going to unlock those coins. And my control of that entry in the ledger remains consequential and absolute.

If the framing you offer was true, then there would literally be no innovation in #Bitcoin at all, it would just be social consensus. It seems rather clear that the innovation is specifically in establishing real economic weight and cryptographic proof as a form of defense of that social consensus. Ordinals have nothing of the sort. The network doesn’t even know they exist.