But economic weight here seems like an invalid category in the frame of this conversation. Yes, it is more valid economically but that does not give it a better or worse stand when it comes to consensus. All blocks have equal weight when it comes to propagation and consensus. Could you explain how exactly, in terms of the consensus protocol, a node becomes more important if it initiated a transaction vs one that didn't?
It is far from it. But it is a good start of something that has a real potential to be a good free speech platform. I do not think decentralized systems will ever fully replace any centralized system but I do think they can grow to a good percentage to capture a good slice of the market and always be present as an alternative for tyranny.
You are right, there is not a 100% chance of it not happening if 100% of the nodes don't have the filtering but the percentage that blocks mined by a miner that do not conform with the nodes' rules get rejected and becomes an orphan block go up as the number of nodes validating that block based on those rules goes up. We don't need 100% of the nodes to have spam filtering, we just need that minimum critical mass where there is a strong chance that orphan blocks are created - which should start incentivizing miners to comply a bit more with the more restrictive parameters to avoid loosing all their effort in an orphan block.
I see too much hype for pumping our bags and we have lost the "why" of bitcoin. Separation of money and state. Only then will we get freedom and sovereignty to really be productive. Thankfully, I see a lot of bitcoiners realizing this and trying to refocus on the real mission. These types of "reserves" that are coming out feel more like click bait than the real thing. They are treating it like an asset - which is better than not valuing it at all - but the real revolution will be when a state eliminates capital gains tax from bitcoin. Which I have been reading that Missouri is doing?
Every node works equally to validate each block, regardless if they are passive or in active economical use. So I don't quite understand where this distinction is coming from. Can you elaborate? I don't see how consensus is separate from propagation. Nodes validate blocks, once validated per their node's rules they then move on to propagate across their peer nodes to initiate consensus. How does an economically active node does propagation but the other doesn't?
We all are. We might just be a few steps ahead but I still have a long way to learn too to achieve what I want.
Do not get discourage. Even if you are not running the Knots protocol, I encourage you to get your node and run it. Don't think you need to understand everything before getting started. Get one up an running and once you get over that bump you can look into understanding further issues - like the current one of Knots vs Core and the filtering issues and make a decision. Just by adding a node you help to strengthen the network and further decentralize it.
Nodes validate blocks and propagate them throughout the network. It does not matter if you are using them economically. Just by virtue of being active and reachable you are part of the network that supports the economic use of it. Could you explain a bit more what is the mechanism the network uses to discriminate against "non-economic" nodes?
The only way to achieve a #Solarpunk future, where technology serves us, instead of enslaving us, is through #Bitcoin. Fix the base incentive structure of civilization or keep watching it burn.
And it is not by error. Once you have a sick population then it is easier to not just manipulate but directly control. Wake up and take your sovereignty back.
This is what complacency gets us as a population. Ditch convenience and exercise your sovereignty. You are giving to the state something your children will never see again. Don't just buy #Bitcoin, have it in self-custody, this is the revolution. 
Knots keeps growing. Up and inching its way towards 5th place. People keep voting with their feet and doing the proof-of-work to show what they actually want #Bitcoin to be. If you haven't changed to Knots or do not run your own sovereign node yet, do not hesitate - look to understand what is happening and take action. May you choose the right Node in this war. #NodeWar 
Money is a ledger and a ledger is a database. But not any database, a very specific database. A monetary database. Anyone arguing otherwise and looking to expand this definition of monetary database to include any and all types of data is looking to reduce #Bitcoin 's specificity as money. If #Bitcoin is not the best money it can be, it will fail - make no mistake about it. May you choose the right Node in this war. #NodeWar
Understand, be vigilant, and above all be ready to fight for what is important. #NodeWar #Bitcoin
What are the potential consequences of removing the OP_RETURN limit?
"The known issues are bad enough. Nobody is even considering the unknown unknowns at this point." - nostr:npub1lh273a4wpkup00stw8dzqjvvrqrfdrv2v3v4t8pynuezlfe5vjnsnaa9nk
Hopefully the #NodeWar brings the focus of bitcoiners back to the original mission. The separation of money and state. Fix the money, fix the world. If you sell your soul to gain the world, it was all for nothing. #Bitcoin
One of the subtle but effective tactics on this #NodeWar is the subversive shift on #bitcoin being perceived as bitcoin "the money" to bitcoin "the database". Do not fall for it. Study and understand the fundamentals and stay focused. May you choose the right Node.
And this is why NOSTR is as important as #Bitcoin. 
Knots implementation for Bitcoin Nodes keeps steadily rising. It already overtook the latest Core version. #Bitcoin #NodeWars 
As #bitcoin reaches the threshold of $100k…be happy but remember the why of #bitcoin. Fix the money, fix the world. Freedom comes at the price of stying vigilant.
The current #bitcoin Node Wars perfectly encapsulates the design principle of “specificity vs flexibility”. Something cannot be optimal if its flexible - by virtue of trying to do two things instead of one, it is by definition less specific and therefore less optimal. For #bitcoin to be the best money, it has to make every trade off in its design towards being specifically the best money, otherwise it is not optimal. Trying to also be a platform for non-financial data is making trade offs in favor of the non-monetary direction. May you choose the right Node.
First Bitcoin, then NOSTR, and now Linux - what should be my next open source, freedom technology, I should look into to adopt or support? Looking for suggestions!