No, but I do think it is political.
My complaint was that you did an appeal to the majority, making it out that the "no-change" camp was the fringe minority.
From where I'm sitting that looks very much like an attempt to discredit those who are questioning Core.
And to come full circle, swaying public opinion, that is Bitcoin politics.
You're quite confused.
What I've been saying is that due to how data propagates on flood-fill mesh networks, trying to stop data via relay policies is ineffective if you don't have something like 98% enforcement.
And I'm quite sure that Knots won't achieve that level of adoption.
Your manipulations are disgusting.
Totally fair to argue your side and what you think is right.
But that's not what I was reacting to.
The level of nodes filtering out arbitratry data bigger than 82 Bytes is 97.5% at the moment because only Core V30 allowes OP_RETURN bigger than 82 Bytes (and 5 or 6 of Peter Todd's libre nodes). Its Core V30 will need more than 20% to at least occasionally add some transactions with arbitrary data. To reliably work they will need more than that.
Core v30 is at 2.55%………
Your credibility and the credibility of core is mediocre at best and is going to take a further nose dive……
How is your Citrea investment going that utilizes the blown up op return?
😉
This statement is precisely why it was ridiculous for Shinobi to claim running knots was a form of “censorship”. The core team’s defenses are weak sauce and built on a shaky foundation of hubris.
Follow the money
