rich1.0Asaf Fulks (npub1ze…4n8ys)https://nostr.now/npub1zete4tgtqyfns5zavpa882ej9tt2gfhhd97rursq0crztzt2hyhsk4n8ysnjumphttps://nostr.nowMigrated both my nodes from Knots to Core. When I wrote the consensus change checklist, I scored BIP-110 against my own 20 criteria and it didn't clear the bar. The framework is supposed to be neutral — a tool, not a verdict. But I was still running the client that's now packaged as the activation vehicle for that exact proposal. Running BIP-110-bundled software while publishing analytical work arguing the proposal doesn't meet activation criteria is a contradiction I couldn't keep ignoring. This isn't anti-Knots. Knots is legitimate software and the mempool policy work is real. What changed is the product — the codebase now ships activation code by default, opt-in to enable but present in the binary. My response to the package changing isn't a referendum on the client. For anyone wondering: Core lets you configure mempool policy in bitcoin.conf. You don't need Knots to filter your own node. The defaults differ; the knobs are still there. Migration was clean — moved chainstate between app data dirs on Umbrel, no IBD. 875G chain intact, ~15 minutes per node. The checklist applies to me too. That's the whole point of writing one.