c) A blockchain where we allow monetary transfers to be recorded on and reject malicious transactions trying to abuse it as cloud storage. Like when we reject any transaction containing more than 1 OP_RETURN output (for many years).
And what's the border to that? Alright, softfork says that more than 1 OP_RETURN is invalid. Great. Now, people don't use OP_RETURN at all. They store their data in chunks of 160-bit addresses, and send 0 coins to multiple of these addresses. What next? Invalidate transactions which spend 0 coins? Alright, they then spend 1 sat for each. You've probably guessed how this goes.
I'm going to argue the Ordinal transactions aren't monetary. They all pay miners, don't they? Transaction is information. The only way to distinguish transactions is based on what they pay. If you introduce stuff like "Ordinal-like txs are excluded from the network", you're just digging your own hole.
I'm impressed Bitcoin experts from this board are yet to realize that the real attack is the attempt to invalidating transactions which they don't think "they are worth it".