Hi Antoine,

> You state that between 0.1% and 0.75% of all bitcoins in existence are
> held in P2TR outputs, and use this figure to conclude the
> "overwhelming majority of **value transfer** in bitcoin is still
> happening in a pre-Taproot script context".

I think you might have misparsed my email; I wasn't using one
observation to justify the other.

I ran a script[0] to tally the value of newly created outputs by address
type, and the node tells me that 93.5% of all output-value created over
the last three months is non-P2TR.

I'll leave it to you as to whether 93.5% constitutes an "overwhelming
majority of value transfer," but I wouldn't really consider that
characterization as dishonest.

> In 2024 and 2025 between 20% and 40% of all onchain transfers used
> Taproot[^0].

If we're going to talk about cherry-picking, here's where to do it.
From the previously linked mempool.space research post[1], they "find
that the vast majority (86%) of p2tr UTXOs are sub-1000 sats in value."
So the case for *ahem* "legitimate" Taproot activity is probably worse.

[0]: https://gist.github.com/jamesob/1e3b07af5fbc1ef9bd9471d83f8d1fa6
[1]: https://research.mempool.space/utxo-set-report/


> We should not provide new features for an outdated scripting context
> unless we have a strong reason to.

Based on the numbers above, many users would likely disagree that
witness v0 is outdated. Sure, there are benefits to Taproot and I like
Schnorr signatures as much as the next guy, but the fact is that there's
nothing wrong with wit v0 and most users of bitcoin still make use of
it. Professionally, I'm in this position.

I'll respond to the other stuff later.

Sincerely,
James