Hi Greg -
I think it's worth pointing out that "just update configs instead of having to update software" is exactly what this BIP is proposing, and it takes this idea a step further by giving users the ability to update their filter software without having to update their bitcoin node software.
For miners wanting to add customizations, a modular system like the one in the BIP proposal is clearly a better experience than having to edit hardcoded filters in bitcoind.
You seem to be arguing that miners should be able to change their local policies but that non-mining nodes should have to update their policies to match what miners are using, is that correct?
I don't see a problem with letting users relay (or refuse to relay) whatever
transactions they like. If a transaction format is not commonly
filtered, it will most likely get confirmed. Conversely, if a
supermajority of nodes filters it, it will probably not be confirmed. I
very much doubt that a supermajority of nodes would agree to filter
something harmless. But even if they do, there is always direct miner
submission (additional work is required to support small miners), so censorship is very unlikely.
As for your comments on "distributed authoritarianism"... it just seems like you're saying "everyone might agree to do something core devs don't want them to do, so we can't allow that". But perhaps I misunderstood?
Anyway, forcing users to relay transactions they consider abusive if they want to relay any transactions at all does not seem in keeping with bitcoin's ethos, not to mention that it obviously would never work.
Best regards,
--Chris Guida