There was no 'attitude' from me.
Bitcoin Core didn't increase the OP_RETURN limit in version 30. It was increased months earlier by the Bitcoin network; an in fact the consensus limit on OP_RETURNs was set to 1MB at least 10 years ago.
The Bitcoin Network made its own decentralized autonomous decision to accept large OP_RETURNs, and it made that decision before v30 existed
In fact, the number of large OP_RETURNs actually decrease slightly after v30 was released
You disagree with that decision. That's fine. But it's difficult for you to argue with the Bitcoin Network, precisely because it's decentralized and autonomous. Who are you going to argue with? You can't blame Core30, as the Network had already made the decision months earlier.
By the time v30 was released in October 2025, the default in Bitcoin Core was "effective", it was having one harmful effect and no positive effect: It was stopping small miners and small pools from seeing the transactions that were going to be mined. Again, you might disagree with that, but you have to be realistic if you want to go to war against the Tolerant Minority; it's very difficult to stop us
I know this seems repetitive to you. But this is an important opportunity to learn. People like me, in the Tolerant Minority, step in to take action to save Bitcoin. We don't ask for permission from Core or from Knots. You don't like our decisions sometimes, but that's what happens in a decentralized system.
Serious question: why did you think BIP-110 would succeed? It was harmful to Bitcoin's monetary purpose, as it would bloat the UTXO set, and the main leaders were liars
research.mempool.space/opreturn-report/
SatsAndSports
npub1zt…wxm56
2026-08-14 14:17:08 UTC
in reply to nevent1q…mkc4
Author Public Key
npub1zthq85gksjsjthv8h6rec2qeqs2mu0emrm9xknkhgw7hfl7csrnq6wxm56Seen on
wss://nostr.landPublished at
2026-08-14 14:17:08 UTCEvent JSON
{
"id": "2d1e7b8aceb07b132ba0b791b548ce37e1a5a37cda794823c23248ea2f4dbd64",
"pubkey": "12ee03d11684a125dd87be879c28190415be3f3b1eca6b4ed743bd74ffd880e6",
"created_at": 1786717028,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"33099fb3af94de49ac524ae7343f07c4faf7ba7f276c6f95e423e478a6ad9b94",
"wss://nos.lol/",
"root",
"f527cf970ce260e74261214bf612e8f75a59db1835ed7e4053326c3f65e232ee"
],
[
"e",
"ba2f389dcccccb4aed830adc59f7561af66756d19ed47bc38461a1d274c8d190",
"wss://nostr.bitcoiner.social/",
"reply",
"f527cf970ce260e74261214bf612e8f75a59db1835ed7e4053326c3f65e232ee"
],
[
"p",
"f527cf970ce260e74261214bf612e8f75a59db1835ed7e4053326c3f65e232ee"
]
],
"content": "There was no 'attitude' from me.\n\nBitcoin Core didn't increase the OP_RETURN limit in version 30. It was increased months earlier by the Bitcoin network; an in fact the consensus limit on OP_RETURNs was set to 1MB at least 10 years ago.\n\nThe Bitcoin Network made its own decentralized autonomous decision to accept large OP_RETURNs, and it made that decision before v30 existed\n\nIn fact, the number of large OP_RETURNs actually decrease slightly after v30 was released\n\nYou disagree with that decision. That's fine. But it's difficult for you to argue with the Bitcoin Network, precisely because it's decentralized and autonomous. Who are you going to argue with? You can't blame Core30, as the Network had already made the decision months earlier.\n\nBy the time v30 was released in October 2025, the default in Bitcoin Core was \"effective\", it was having one harmful effect and no positive effect: It was stopping small miners and small pools from seeing the transactions that were going to be mined. Again, you might disagree with that, but you have to be realistic if you want to go to war against the Tolerant Minority; it's very difficult to stop us\n\nI know this seems repetitive to you. But this is an important opportunity to learn. People like me, in the Tolerant Minority, step in to take action to save Bitcoin. We don't ask for permission from Core or from Knots. You don't like our decisions sometimes, but that's what happens in a decentralized system.\n\nSerious question: why did you think BIP-110 would succeed? It was harmful to Bitcoin's monetary purpose, as it would bloat the UTXO set, and the main leaders were liars\n\nresearch.mempool.space/opreturn-report/",
"sig": "bf77d19aeca2036bc2cbe02e7b895347ddb886630db858a771685f21d7435b4a7fe06078d56913149423669f0977332da6b6b6b3505bddd155874786703690d4"
}