Quote from: alani123 on Today at 12:31:03 AM

I can't fathom that we're standing idly by watching this all unfold. Please let's all agree that it's time to end ordinals.

What are you going to do about it? Bitcoin is designed to be censorship resistant, so you can't just "end ordinals".

Quote from: AHOYBRAUSE on Today at 01:40:55 AM

It's happening all over again.

What can developers do to actually prevent that from happening in the future?
I mean really, I have no idea, that's why I ask.

Nothing, Bitcoin is designed to be censorship resistant.

Quote from: franky1 on Today at 05:04:35 AM

i still laugh when they promised "taproot will only be 1 signature length" yet its used to have 3.99mb of non signature junk instead

It seems you have absolutely no clue what you are talking about. You don't need Taproot for ordinals, they are doing inscriptions on Litecoin (which has not upgraded to Taproot) too.

Quote from: PrivacyG on Today at 05:51:18 AM

It is time to end Ordinals. But it is a high risk task to roll back. It sets a precedent and this has always been avoided by the Bitcoin community. Rather spend time trying to find ways to stop Ordinals instead of rolling back.

You can't "end" ordinals.

Quote from: pooya87 on Today at 10:30:07 AM

The only way to battle the Ordinals Attack is for the nodes to start rejecting these spam/abusive transactions but unfortunately nodes need to be patched to give the node users this choice and that is not happening since the developers aren't really interested in doing that much to prevent this attack!

Your censorship solution has already been circumvented by inscribers: Transactions over 100kvB are already rejected by nodes' mempools, yet, miners are putting them in blocks anyway.