short answer is i am one of the people that believes a robus...

Raw JSON

{
  "kind": 1,
  "id": "817b874592b40acc9eb912d49622623f46f8cb33f80d6888004769206c7972da",
  "pubkey": "5beb861a2d7f63fca94344f36b29ee60e3fac8282c596fe5b0276dd81741e03a",
  "created_at": 1786141568,
  "tags": [
    [
      "e",
      "f03b413d62f39ad004d70016dc4884f3980249d178be22b80726b2fb69fa8b80",
      "wss://nostr.wine/",
      "root",
      "314072c16fa9433e1374f62e5b02c8163946ed298a9cde3b1541513c29d19fff"
    ],
    [
      "e",
      "a73b18e83ba9cd3849cf95bf97f0f1df4c45dd392144617d2a46bb3633226a5b",
      "wss://relay.mostr.pub/",
      "",
      "5beb861a2d7f63fca94344f36b29ee60e3fac8282c596fe5b0276dd81741e03a"
    ],
    [
      "e",
      "328131506b07b39ff58fcff067ad7967c58aef10adede76335a90f8677276656",
      "wss://relay.mostr.pub/",
      "reply",
      "314072c16fa9433e1374f62e5b02c8163946ed298a9cde3b1541513c29d19fff"
    ],
    [
      "p",
      "5beb861a2d7f63fca94344f36b29ee60e3fac8282c596fe5b0276dd81741e03a",
      "wss://relay.mostr.pub/"
    ],
    [
      "p",
      "314072c16fa9433e1374f62e5b02c8163946ed298a9cde3b1541513c29d19fff",
      "wss://nostr.wine/"
    ],
    [
      "client",
      "Amethyst"
    ]
  ],
  "content": "short answer is i am one of the people that believes a robust fee market is not a bad thing.  the sub 1 sat per v byte thing is a bigger problem than spam imho.  Satoshi wrote \"in 20 years time there will be either very large transaction volume or no volume\".  so for me a robust fee market of 5 sats per v byte to 50 price would be ideal.  Ironically enough a robust fee market would indicate that people are using as bitcoin as money which i think is one of your stated goals.   truth be told i believe that spam will price itself on its own without knots or whatever.\n\nthe longer answer is that if you want to remove spam the only way i see it is to price it out.  so the question, for me at least, becomes; should we remove the segwit discount?  that would surely increase the fee market.  but it would also be a defacto block size decrease and i am not sure if that is feasible at this point and it would certainly disincentivize spam.  if knots and 110 proposed breaking current consensus doing away with segwit and taproot then that would be a compelling solution that would likely remove spam for the most part permanently.  the tradeoffs of course is that lightning would be kneecapped (im not sold that is necessarily a bad thing as it seems lightning in many respects has been captured by the large corporations).  as im not a programmer if i wanted to rid the blockchain of spam i would beat the drums for a reduction of segwit and taproot but im not 100% convinced that is a good idea (its also odd to me that such ideas are rejected by the people advocating for rdts... if spam is such a problem and you need to change consensus then why not remove the features that would actually solve the problem you are so worried about?).    removing segwit and taproot would also cause a lot of reduction in blockspace to the point where it is an impractical move.    adding more rules and complicating things is putting the cart before the horse. furthermore, i think what makes bitcoin special is its difficulty to change.  in a decentralized system nobody is going to get everything they want, thats the beauty of bitcoin.  if it was easy to change because a small, vocal minority wanted a thing to be changed then that would be a real problem and not something id feel comfortable building my future upon.  that is my real problem with knots/110.",
  "sig": "8efe51ab7aa2c8368a08b01cc631fb852848dca13c37612d57fe70ee45d8d4f4e7486b374e14a5909adf475829819ace818ebd075b2b78a51968391a43d078b7"
}