Michael Saylor, the executive chairman of Strategy and the figure controlling the largest corporate Bitcoin treasury, has publicly laid out a detailed critique of BIP-110, a proposed temporary fork aimed at limiting non-monetary transactions on the Bitcoin network. In a lengthy post on X.com on July 19, 2026, Saylor presented what he described as 110 reasons for opposing the proposal, arguing for what he called neutral rules, hard consensus, open markets, and permissionless innovation.
The core of the BIP-110 dispute
BIP-110, introduced in December 2025 by pseudonymous developer Dathon Ohm with support from Ocean protocol founder Luke Dashjr, is designed to curb Ordinals inscriptions and other arbitrary data that some argue spam the Bitcoin blockchain. Proponents say the measure is necessary to preserve Bitcoin’s original purpose as a peer-to-peer cash system and to keep node operation accessible. Saylor acknowledged the seriousness of those concerns, stating, Many Bitcoiners I respect support BIP 110. They want to keep validation accessible, protect node operators from unwanted costs and content, preserve affordable payments, and keep Bitcoin focused on sound money. He added, I share the objectives. I disagree about the remedy.
Also read: SpaceX stock slips below $135 IPO price as Starship test flight approaches
The proposal has reignited debates reminiscent of the Blocksize Wars of 2015–2017, when the community was deeply divided over scaling solutions. Saylor’s post, which had garnered over 879,000 views within hours, explicitly aimed to critique the proposal itself rather than its backers, emphasizing that Bitcoin is strongest when we can disagree vigorously without mistaking allies for enemies.
Network support and Ordinals activity
Despite the heated rhetoric, BIP-110 remains far from activation. The proposal requires support from 55% of Bitcoin nodes validating blocks over a given block period. In the most recent period, period 475, only 1% of blocks signaled support. This low adoption rate comes at a time when Ordinals activity has dropped significantly. Over the last month, fewer than 10,000 Ordinals have been inscribed daily, down from a peak of over 400,000 in August 2023, according to Dune Analytics data.
Also read: Three Democratic senators oppose CLARITY Act on ethics grounds as Senate vote nears
Prominent industry figures remain divided. Blockstream CEO Adam Back has criticized BIP-110 as a quest to police other people, arguing that Bitcoin’s decentralized ethos means you can’t impose your views on others. In contrast, Dashjr and supporters describe Ordinals-driven bloat as a serious threat requiring an imminent fix. They also argue that BIP-110 includes a temporary one-year limit, meaning it would not permanently invalidate fee-paying transactions.
What this means for Bitcoin governance
The BIP-110 debate represents a fundamental tension within the Bitcoin community: how to balance permissionless innovation with the need to maintain the network’s core value proposition as sound money. Saylor’s intervention, given his influence as a major corporate holder, adds significant weight to the opposition camp. However, the low node support suggests that, for now, the network is not inclined to adopt the fork. The broader implication is that Bitcoin’s governance remains messy, decentralized, and resistant to rapid change — a feature that many consider a strength.
Conclusion
Michael Saylor’s detailed opposition to BIP-110 underscores a deepening philosophical divide over Bitcoin’s future. While the proposal’s supporters cite network health and accessibility, opponents like Saylor and Back warn against imposing restrictions that could undermine Bitcoin’s permissionless nature. With node support currently minimal and Ordinals activity at near-historic lows, BIP-110 appears unlikely to be activated in the near term, but the debate itself highlights the ongoing challenge of governing a decentralized protocol.
FAQs
Q1: What is BIP-110?
BIP-110 is a Bitcoin Improvement Proposal that would temporarily fork the network to limit non-monetary transactions, such as Ordinals inscriptions, aiming to reduce blockchain bloat and preserve Bitcoin’s use as a peer-to-peer cash system.
Q2: Why does Michael Saylor oppose BIP-110?
Saylor argues that the proposal imposes restrictive rules that conflict with Bitcoin’s principles of permissionless innovation and open markets. He published 110 reasons against it, emphasizing neutral rules and hard consensus.
Q3: What are the chances of BIP-110 being approved?
Approval requires 55% of Bitcoin nodes to signal support over a block period. In the most recent period, only 1% of blocks supported the proposal, making activation unlikely in the immediate future.
Be the first to comment