Yeah, my first reaction was that we shouldn’t have a configuration option where we cannot provide guidance when it would be good to use it. Given the strong emotional reaction, I have come to the position that it would be better to keep the option as people would feel that it is being taken away.

Overall, I’d still prefer that it eventually be removed to reduce the documentation and maintenance burden, as I don’t perceive it to be useful in the long run, but for the time being there is demand for it, so I will argue against removing it.

Is it not paternalistic to remove the ability of node operators to limit OP_RETURN data in their own mempools?

Hodl117

bitcoin

Quick questions about OP_RETURN? Quick answers here.

tidwell

Other mempool policies are targeting DoS issues, detrimental use, and protect upgrade hooks. The OP_RETURN limits are the last obviously paternalistic, "we’d rather you don’t use Bitcoin for this thing that some people want to use it for" rules. I don’t anticipate that this is just the start of other mempool policies being removed.