Can you suggest any reason that it shouldn't be done? I'm waiting to hear an answer that isn't just a rant about shitcoins or spam, none of which is particularly relevant argument against removing the limit.
Okay maybe I over exaggerated the part of becoming Ethereum
But I still believe the concern is valid.
Bitcoin is first a decentralized currency not a general-purpose data store.
Removing the OP RETURN limit could shift developer and user focus away from financial transactions to incentivize non-monetary applications.
I get that workarounds like Taproot already store data, but removing OP_RETURN limits would incentivize even more non-financial use, risking node centralization and higher fees for regular users.
Not to mention embedding large illegal files (e.g., pirated content) easier, burdening nodes with legal risks.
I'm not saying the above issues don't exist in current system but it's on a lower scale.
Most of the issue of removing the OP_RETURN limit are economical and cultural not really technical perse.
There's always a trade off and I understand the issue of fake outputs
But users were expecting a solution to the ordinals birth last time to protect Bitcoin monetary utility.
Not one that relies solely on the fact that users make use of fake outputs due to limited space.