I was curious how the new OCEAN block templates compare in terms of fees. Here's a quick-and-dirty client-side tool that connects the OCEAN web sockets and plots the fees in the template: https://0xb10c.github.io/ocean-xyz-templates/

I get weird vibes from Ocean, even though I like this idea of giving the miners an option of which template to use

This is a step in the right direction. Ultimately the "inscription problem" is best handled by miners penalizing "data transactions" over "financial transactions" in template construction.

Just as an example, imagine if mining pools agreed to impose a 2x median fee penalty on "data transactions". So if your inscription transaction wasn't at least paying double the median fee, then it would get excluded from that block template.

This would wind up being a win-win-win for all. Miners win because they get greater fees, Users win because regular financial transactions have a priority, and Shitconers win because they get a known and predictable cost to their shitcoinery.

they really want knots to be a thing, huh?

No matter what, always choose Core

Some game theory there "OCEAN will continue its 0% promotional pool fee for options 1 & 2 while there will be a competitive pool fee of 2% for option 3."

Embarrassing launch overall.