It was initially considered that by making coinbase transactions unique through a soft-fork and addressing a specific historical block (block 490,897) could potentially eliminate the need for BIP30 validation entirely. However, this approach has been scrutinized and found lacking due to theoretical vulnerabilities in older blockchain forks prior to the activation of BIP34, which could still necessitate BIP30 checks.

Further examination reveals that the complexities involved in retroactively ensuring the uniqueness of pre-BIP34 coinbase transactions without introducing significant new mechanisms (such as checkpoints) may not justify the effort. Thus, the idea of completely removing BIP30 validation from the protocol seems impractical. Instead, a more feasible solution proposed is to ensure the uniqueness of coinbase transaction identifiers (txids) after a certain block height (1'983,702) using methods such as modifying the nLockTime parameter or employing an alternative strategy. This method would allow for maintaining the necessary BIP30 validation for older blocks and forks, thereby acknowledging the importance of historical validation checks while streamlining future transactions.

In essence, while the concept of simplifying blockchain validation rules through soft-forks is appealing, practical considerations and potential security implications suggest a more cautious approach. Ensuring the integrity of both past and future transactions remains a paramount concern, necessitating a balanced solution that addresses efficiency without compromising the blockchain's foundational security principles.