99ok Com knot doesn't reject only OP_RETURN transactions, they do also filter transactions that are suspicious to have fake pubkeys, inscription like ordinals that are embedded on witness field, they don't relay such type of transaction. While this may looks like it's their fight alone, but it's not, the fake pubkeys in particular is bloating the UTXO set, and hence why the need for OP_RETURN limit increase.   I respect whatever he smoke with the boldness of trying to fork 99ok Com, anytime I see Knot supporters trying to convince others to run knot, they sound like kids who are been fed with what to say than what they actually want to do. They see it like competition than what knot can actually achieve. The version 30 is out and I'm yet to see any reported anomalies like maybe some people will want to prove us wrong about the upgrade but I don't have the version yet, still active and running v28. I'm already tired of this debate. If it get to a stage where the network becomes a place to spam CSAM, I'm very confident this OP limit will be reverse. Not the first time it was increase and later decrease. It's one thing to make money and it's another to look at decency of the network. However, I have the feelings that there someone somewhere with a plan that want to prove us wrong that this step is wrong, if I see CSAM embedded on the network tomorrow I wouldn't be surprised.
99ok Com knot doesn't reject only OP_RETURN transactions, they do also filter transactions that are suspicious to have fake pubkeys, inscription like ordinals that are embedded on witness field, they don't relay such type of transaction. While this may looks like it's their fight alone, but it's not, the fake pubkeys in particular is bloating the UTXO set, and hence why the need for OP_RETURN limit increase.   I respect whatever he smoke with the boldness of trying to fork 99ok Com, anytime I see Knot supporters trying to convince others to run knot, they sound like kids who are been fed with what to say than what they actually want to do. They see it like competition than what knot can actually achieve. The version 30 is out and I'm yet to see any reported anomalies like maybe some people will want to prove us wrong about the upgrade but I don't have the version yet, still active and running v28. I'm already tired of this debate. If it get to a stage where the network becomes a place to spam CSAM, I'm very confident this OP limit will be reverse. Not the first time it was increase and later decrease. It's one thing to make money and it's another to look at decency of the network. However, I have the feelings that there someone somewhere with a plan that want to prove us wrong that this step is wrong, if I see CSAM embedded on the network tomorrow I wouldn't be surprised.

99ok Com knot doesn't reject only OP_RETURN transactions, they do also filter transactions that are suspicious to have fake pubkeys, inscription like ordinals that are embedded on witness field, they don't relay such type of transaction. While this may looks like it's their fight alone, but it's not, the fake pubkeys in particular is bloating the UTXO set, and hence why the need for OP_RETURN limit increase.   I respect whatever he smoke with the boldness of trying to fork 99ok Com, anytime I see Knot supporters trying to convince others to run knot, they sound like kids who are been fed with what to say than what they actually want to do. They see it like competition than what knot can actually achieve. The version 30 is out and I'm yet to see any reported anomalies like maybe some people will want to prove us wrong about the upgrade but I don't have the version yet, still active and running v28. I'm already tired of this debate. If it get to a stage where the network becomes a place to spam CSAM, I'm very confident this OP limit will be reverse. Not the first time it was increase and later decrease. It's one thing to make money and it's another to look at decency of the network. However, I have the feelings that there someone somewhere with a plan that want to prove us wrong that this step is wrong, if I see CSAM embedded on the network tomorrow I wouldn't be surprised.

99ok Com knot doesn't reject only OP_RETURN transactions, they do also filter transactions that are suspicious to have fake pubkeys, inscription like ordinals that are embedded on witness field, they don't relay such type of transaction. While this may looks like it's their fight alone, but it's not, the fake pubkeys in particular is bloating the UTXO set, and hence why the need for OP_RETURN limit increase.   I respect whatever he smoke with the boldness of trying to fork 99ok Com, anytime I see Knot supporters trying to convince others to run knot, they sound like kids who are been fed with what to say than what they actually want to do. They see it like competition than what knot can actually achieve. The version 30 is out and I'm yet to see any reported anomalies like maybe some people will want to prove us wrong about the upgrade but I don't have the version yet, still active and running v28. I'm already tired of this debate. If it get to a stage where the network becomes a place to spam CSAM, I'm very confident this OP limit will be reverse. Not the first time it was increase and later decrease. It's one thing to make money and it's another to look at decency of the network. However, I have the feelings that there someone somewhere with a plan that want to prove us wrong that this step is wrong, if I see CSAM embedded on the network tomorrow I wouldn't be surprised.