It's not that we "need" it.  It's that someone found an exploit and people are using it to do something that wasn't anticipated.  So naturally people are now asking whether it's right to change the protocol to make that more difficult for them.  It sounds like you've already made your mind up, but consider taking a moment to ponder the consequences.  Where do we draw the line between freedom and abuse?  It's a really big question and the answer may not be as simple as you might think.



I'd rather see it on shitcoins too.  But my concern is that the response needs to be considered carefully.  If we set a precedent that the protocol needs to change every time someone makes an emotional response to something they personally disapprove of, where does it end?  What if you happen to be using Bitcoin for something that I might personally disapprove of?  Do I then get to argue that we should change the protocol to stop you doing what you want to do?