{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"nobody (npub1ge…4qqp7)","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub1gek0f5s300jzqg4av4e7l4hfejrrkhzf8km2pkuquhfmja6gwdcqw4qqp7","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"I see four groups: \n\nBIP-110 camp: wants to restore data limits by force: a consensus soft-fork via UASF, enforced whether or not miners agree.\n\nCore / Chaincode: wants no arbiter. relay policy shouldn’t judge use cases, so let the fee market decide and remove the lever entirely.\n\nBack / Saylor / institutional: wants immutability. Predictable, coercion-proof rules in both directions, because certainty is the store-of-value pitch.\n\n\nOrdinals / Runes / L2s: wants the data: unrestricted block space, because their businesses run on it.\n\nI feel most aligned with the silent group 5: \nI want the “exit right”: restraint without coercion, decentralization without an arbiter, money-focus lived, not imposed. Guard the ability to leave, not the purity of the chain.\n\nI know what Bitcoin means to me and why I am in this game. As long as the game is aligned with my reasons I will be a part of it. If it strays away I will have no issues leaving it."}