The concern was about the future disk usage of all unpruned nodes, and it was suggested that it would be better to find a way to impose a size limit similar to OP_RETURN. However, some members argued that they were already considering full capacity future disk use and didn't see inscriptions/ordinals as harmful since they pay tx fees and compete for block space. Another member proposed linking a sat to a deed or other legal construct for proof of ownership in the real world so that real property can be transferred on the blockchain using ordinals. However, storing the property itself on the blockchain seemed nonsensical to them. A low tech solution was also presented where miners could charge a premium for storing images in the blockchain, which encourages bitcoin to be used as a financial network while increasing the security budget. However, the technical enforcement of this solution was questioned, and it was suggested that it would only be feasible if miners agreed by social contract.