If we'd talked about what will happen if to implement something new it was a matter of choosing the future rules. But now we already have Ordinals and we already have those ones who use it. Taking away from someone else what is not ours is a bad idea. I'm not a fan of Ordinals, I'm not going to use any kind of "tokens" in bitcoin blockchain, but it is not a question of my own preferences, it is a question of expropriating someones belongings. Don't I understand that Ordinals bring instability and thus less security? I understand. But as Benjamin Franklin said: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." If we'll start to take something from someone for our own convenience, what will be the difference from centralized systems?
Do we have a problem? Yes. Should a solving be worse than a problem?
bitcoin for its first decade had rules that ensured efficiency by not allowing a TX to produce upto 4mb of bloat. where signature space had to contain signatures and methods to prove the spending of a utxo..
the rules have been removed, the checks have become unchecked and data is allowed NOW to be pased without rules or formats
dont pretend that whats happening now is that upto 4mb of bloat has always been the way and where you think that implementing rules is new.. its actually returning rules to how things should be. lean efficient spending of bitcoins
and dont pretend that fixing the removals will stop people transacting. it wont people will still be able to spend their utxos. they just want be able to add dead weight useless junk data to it to the extent that has been RECENTLY exploited