Michael Saylor issues 110‑point critique of Bitcoin BIP‑110 proposal

Executive chairman Michael Saylor of Strategy published a 3,700‑word essay listing “110 reasons” why Bitcoin Improvement Proposal 110 (BIP‑110) is a bad idea. BIP‑110 would introduce a one‑year soft‑fork adding seven consensus rules that restrict non‑financial data such as Ordinals inscriptions, capping OP_RETURN outputs at 83 bytes and limiting other data‑heavy scripts. Saylor argues the change threatens Bitcoin’s core principle of content‑neutrality, creates a dangerous precedent for future consensus‑level content filtering, and lowers the miner‑signaling threshold from the historic 95 % to 55 %. Miner support is currently below 1 %, making activation unlikely. He stresses that Bitcoin should rely on fee‑based market mechanisms rather than consensus rules to curb “spam.”

Saylor’s stance is echoed by other Bitcoin figures, including Blockstream CEO Adam Back, who also opposes the proposal on decentralisation and censorship‑resistance grounds. The proposal’s activation timeline targets a mandatory‑signalling period beginning early August with a planned activation on September 1, but the low signalling rate suggests it will not pass. A key quotation from Saylor captures his view: “Many Bitcoiners I respect support BIP‑110 … the proposed cure is more dangerous than the condition itself.”