Just actually comment on what the BIP does. You can combine it with all the personal attacks you want they just can't be *the entire substance of your complaint.* Do you disagree with the tradeoff of killing OP_IF in taproot given that it's basically only used for spam and making taproot the opposite of the scaling tech it's meant to be? Do you actually want OP_RETURNs to continue being consensus valid up to 1MB in size? Do you see a pressing need to activate another softfork (that isn't CTV) during the year BIP-110 prevents them? Is killing deeper-than-7 trees in taproot going to create some issues?

Many of us would like to hear more of your thoughts on the technical aspects of the BIP because we value your opinion and are trying to gather as many perspectives as possible. It will help people to make a more informed choice. Cheers Matt.

The current conflict has not changed our fundamental understanding of what Bitcoin is. We all have significant skin in the game. In my view, the main difference between us comes down to the information and perspectives we each rely on. I am convinced that almost everyone in Bitcoin values your work. Thanks. However, after a long period of neutrality and silence, suddenly taking a clear side based on speculative arguments naturally triggers reactions. The reason we have different blockchains today is historically connected to Core’s stance against non-monetary transactions. That is a fact. And that stance has clearly shifted. The data that ends up on the blockchain is a direct consequence of the current rules. Bitcoin is meant to be a payment network. If the current state of the blockchain no longer reflects that, then the rules need to be reviewed and, if necessary, adjusted. Instead of personal attacks, the technical arguments should be discussed. If both sides clearly state what they disagree with on a technical level, compromises and durable solutions can be developed. Especially if the goal is the same. That is exactly what I hardly see from Core and why i oppose it. Why, after such a long time, has no serious compromise even been visibly explored? If concerns are widely expressed and there is still no sign of meaningful reconsideration, it does not look like an open process. It looks like a predetermined direction being pushed through.

Hey @ODELL I’m genuinely open to being proven wrong and say I’m sorry. If you’re willing to publish a detailed, substantive response video that meaningfully addresses the technical aspects (similar in depth and seriousness to what @84630768…fa019ae8 did) of course. Furthermore, if you ever decide to publicly support BIP-110, I will record a public apology video mentioning you and donate 100k sats to a pro bono Bitcoin cause of your choice. I’m aware that 100k sats might seem like a laughable amount to you given the scale at which you operate, but it’s not a small amount to me. And I would do it in a heartbeat - without hesitation.

I'm still trying to understand the reason why @ODELL @84630768…fa019ae8 haven't done a debate yet. Like grown men talk and have a genuine conversation

Anyone who disagrees with you is a part of the lynch mob. THAT IS WHAT YOU SAID 😂