> I already openes the discussion on the Bitcoin-dev mailing list.

Link?

I applaud your effort to fork off.

I'll settle for their suggestion. Personally o don't think the issue is worth changing consensus rules. 

But I'd respect the argument a lot more if that is what they were proposing. Good luck. 

Let's do it. Would you like to contribute and spread the word about the idea, perhaps? I am going to contribute on the technical side and I already openes the discussion on the Bitcoin-dev mailing list.

gregtonoski

I agree that consensus rules need to change, but I disagree that mempool policies are useful to any great extent (and I certainly don't think they are worth getting worked up over).

While I don't think "Bitcoin came to be and succeeded," I do think Satoshi managed to get a few key elements in place and that started this whole thing off. I'll settle for filter proponents suggesting a change to block validation rules and standing by it.

bitcoin

"Quasi-consensus": help me understand this conversation with Chris Guida

Scoresby

I agree that consensus rules need to change, but I disagree that mempool policies are useful to any great extent (and I certainly don't think they are worth getting worked up over). 

While I don't think "Bitcoin came to be and succeeded," I do think Satoshi managed to get a few key elements in place and that started this whole thing off. I'll settle for filter proponents suggesting a change to block validation rules and standing by it. 