According to @adam3us (Twitter, Oct 5, 2025), fighting spam is an arms race and is harder on Bitcoin because of its anti-censorship design. Bitcoin relies on transaction fees and limited block space to deter spam, which creates a fee-bidding market under congestion that impacts confirmation times and on-chain costs (source: Satoshi Nakamoto, Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System, 2008; Bitcoin.org Developer Guide – Transactions and Fees). Traders can manage execution risk by monitoring mempool size and sat/vB fee bands to plan BTC settlement timing and costs during congestion cycles (source: Bitcoin.org Developer Guide – Mempool and Fees).

According to @adam3us, stopping spam has never worked on the internet and Bitcoin’s censorship-resistant, decentralized design makes protocol-level spam filtering ineffective; filter-as-protest is fine, but filters won’t work, source: Adam Back, X post dated Oct 5, 2025. According to @adam3us, traders should not expect effective on-chain spam blacklists to reduce congestion, and instead assume BTC fee market and mempool dynamics will continue to be market-driven, source: Adam Back, X post dated Oct 5, 2025.

According to Samson Mow, filters are not guaranteed to prevent spam transactions on the Bitcoin network, and it is uncertain whether spammers will consistently use the OP_RETURN function. This highlights that the debate over Bitcoin spam is ideological rather than purely technical, which traders should note as it may impact transaction fees and network reliability in the short term (Source: @Excellion on Twitter, May 6, 2025). Market participants should monitor potential increases in on-chain congestion and related fee volatility, as these factors can affect the timing and cost of Bitcoin trades.