[BIP Proposal] Soft Fork Compromise on op_return to Resolve Current Bitcoin Controversies

The ongoing controversies within the Bitcoin community, particularly following the release of Core 30, have highlighted a significant rift among its members. A proposal has been put forward by Majorian, a long-standing member of the Bitcoin community since 2017, aimed at bridging the gap between various factions. This proposal centers around the implementation of a soft fork that introduces new consensus rules regarding the use of OP_RETURN, a feature that allows for the inclusion of metadata in Bitcoin transactions. The suggested changes include capping the OP_RETURN data size at 83 bytes and limiting to one OP_RETURN output per transaction. These measures are designed to align with historical norms and practices that have governed Bitcoin’s operations effectively for years, thus ensuring consistency and stability across the network.

Majorian's proposal is grounded in simplicity and pragmatism, requiring minimal code alterations for implementation and verification. It seeks to mitigate concerns related to new attack vectors by restricting OP_RETURN usage, thereby preserving Bitcoin's operational heritage without taking sides in the debate over specific implementations like Core or Knots. Importantly, this proposal also aims to provide plausible deniability against the notion that Bitcoin was ever intended as a peer-to-peer file sharing and storage protocol, which could be controversial but is deemed necessary by the proposer.

The overarching goal of this initiative is to foster community healing and refocus efforts on Bitcoin's future development. By introducing a compromise that reflects a return to Bitcoin's state prior to the recent intensification of debates, it is hoped that the current division within the community can be mended. Majorian, while not a programmer, expresses a willingness to contribute to discussions and rally community support for formalizing this proposition into a Bitcoin Improvement Proposal (BIP), seeking feedback from technical experts to identify any potential pitfalls.