In retrospect, it was obvious the letter they signed was justification to merge a clearly controversial PR. It's not obvious what the second and third order effects will be, but I guarantee this will not play out the way that the signers of the letter think it will.
Happy to eat my words and say that I was wrong if a year from now if there isn't a significant growth (>100%) in large OP_RETURN outputs (>160 bytes).
I challenge any signer of the letter to provide a similar metric to measure whether what they're doing works and under what conditions they'd be willing to admit they were wrong.
I hope there will be more (prunable) op returns in a year and fewer fake signatures. Is that not what you would hope?
Please Login to reply.
There is not economic incentive for that. Both system will be used for spamming the network.
That is their proposed strategy: Hope
There will be more op returns and more fake sigs. Guaranteed
