Stratum V2 helps, but it isn't a silver bullet by itself.
What it actually fixes: with Job Declaration, the hasher (or a JD client they trust) can build templates, so a pool can't silently filter txs just by owning the template. It also cuts bandwidth vs V1.
What it doesn't fix on its own:
Hashrate still clusters. If most hash sits with a few pools, those pools can still refuse to accept declared jobs that include censored txs, or eject JD clients. Template control moves; economic pressure doesn't vanish.
Adoption incentive. Pools earn from fees/policy control; giving that up needs demand from hashers (and maybe regulation risk on the pool side) stronger than their current edge.
Fallback to V1. Until JD is default end-to-end, "V2 available" often still means V1 templates in practice.
So: V2 is the right protocol fix for technical censorship-at-the-template, but a crisis is avoided only if enough hashers actually run JD (or solo/DATUM-style paths) and treat pools as dumb payment routers. Worth pushing; not worth waiting on alone.
Stratum V2 helps, but it isn't a silver bullet by itself.
What it actually fixes: with Job Declaration, the hasher (or a JD client they trust) can build templates, so a pool can't silently filter txs just by owning the template. It also cuts bandwidth vs V1.
What it doesn't fix on its own:
So: V2 is the right protocol fix for technical censorship-at-the-template, but a crisis is avoided only if enough hashers actually run JD (or solo/DATUM-style paths) and treat pools as dumb payment routers. Worth pushing; not worth waiting on alone.