Relax OP_RETURN standardness restrictions

In the realm of cryptocurrency mining, particularly within the context of Bitcoin, there's a notable discussion regarding the efficiency and fairness of FPPS (Full Pay-Per-Share) mining pools. These pools have been under scrutiny for not distributing the entire fee component derived from block rewards. This practice reportedly diminishes miners' income more significantly than instances where a block collects considerably lower fees. Although concrete evidence supporting these claims remains elusive, mainly due to the lack of direct access to FPPS mining pools' APIs without creating an account, the conversation brings to light the potential disparities in earnings for miners.

Furthermore, the comparison between different pool fee structures reveals that some FPPS pools charge a 4% pool fee, which is substantially higher than the 1% fee charged by Ocean/Datum. This discrepancy suggests that the choice of mining pool could have a marked impact on miners' overall earnings, beyond just the policies related to transaction selection.

Additionally, an examination of Ocean's block template page indicates a hierarchy in fee collection among various templates, with 'core' templates generally amassing the highest fees, followed by 'core-antispam,' 'ocean,' and 'datafree' templates, in descending order of fee collection. While differences in revenue from these templates are typically minor, a shift in hash power towards specific filtering policies could potentially amplify these discrepancies.

This conversation highlights the nuanced factors contributing to mining profitability, including pool fee structures and transaction selection policies, and underscores the importance of thorough research and consideration when participating in cryptocurrency mining ventures. For those interested in delving deeper into the specifics of block templates and fee distribution, further information can be found through Ocean's block template page.