>> "based on speculation of the worst possible outcome" It's important to remember that this is the level at which changes to bitcoin should be thought through. I saw some snippets of the RHR episode and honestly yes, @04c915da…3dfbecc9 is extremely emotional in his critique. But that aside, most of his points are probably valid. Except the "miners switching after activation" argument. I mean. Because in that case, there would be consensus to move over - despite the transactions that would be erased. I guess consensus is literally the argument to accept rolling back those txs. However, the point that his adversarial thinking here is justified is contradictory to core30 crowd, and especially @f728d9e6…c8a38106 argumentation. In another node, lopp "prepares" us that Knots crowd might ingest the blockchain with child pornography to prove their point. Well.... if an attack vector has been introduced to bitcoin, and you helped introduced that attack vector.... then you're probably to blame if that attack vector is actually utilized. You don't really get to decide what the motive of your opponent is if they decide to perform the attack. This became a longer note than intended, but just a TLDR to end it with: - Odell is thinking in adversarial terms regarding bip110 which is important and arguing that it wont fix spam anyway - but not about core30 which from my understanding doesnt fix spam at all - lopp is being a bitch about introducing an attack vector to bitcoin - maybe nobody should've merged a change, however small, to bitcoin core, if that change was this controversial