Michael Saylor has released a 110-point critique against Bitcoin's BIP-110 proposal, arguing it could harm legitimate transactions and set a dangerous precedent.
Overview
- Michael Saylor, the executive chairman of Strategy, has unveiled a detailed 110-point argument against the proposed Bitcoin improvement BIP-110.
- The proposal seeks to impose temporary limits on non-financial data, such as Ordinals and inscriptions, within the Bitcoin network.
- Saylor argues that this move sets a dangerous precedent by invalidating currently legitimate transactions that generate fees.
Michael Saylor has ramped up his criticism of BIP-110, a soft fork proposal aimed at restricting non-financial data on the Bitcoin network, by releasing a substantial essay outlining 110 reasons it should not be implemented. He contends that the potential harms of this proposal outweigh its intended benefits.
Titled "110 Reasons BIP 110 Is a Bad Idea," the essay advocates for the preservation of neutral rules and ongoing innovation, while expressing support for reducing validation costs and ensuring affordable transactions. Ultimately, Saylor disputes the proposed solution's effectiveness.
https://t.co/wmUErVBFOo
— Michael Saylor (@saylor) July 18, 2026
BIP-110 aims to tighten Bitcoin's consensus rules for about a year, targeting methods for embedding arbitrary data and particularly focusing on inscriptions and Ordinals that have increased the use of block space and transaction fees since 2023. Proponents, including developer Luke Dashjr and the Bitcoin Knots group, argue it will reduce spam, while opponents fear it may invalidate valid transactions.
Questioning the Proposal
Saylor elaborates on his stance that the main danger lies in the precedent BIP-110 could establish. He points out that Bitcoin cannot discern the intent behind data, meaning limiting data types could block legitimate applications. He maintains that simply labeling a use case as 'spam' does not invalidate it.
He warns that modifying consensus rules to regulate one contentious use could set a precedent for regulating others, potentially affecting privacy tools and innovative financial mechanisms. Although the restrictions are temporary, Saylor cautions that the implications would be lasting, labeling BIP-110 a "Bitcoin Iatrogenic Proposal" due to its potential unintended consequences.
Moreover, he criticizes the proposal's activation mechanism, which lowers the miner sign-off requirement from 95% to 55% and removes the option for a proposal to quietly expire. Current miner signaling is below 1%, which raises concerns about the likelihood of activation and the potential for network fragmentation.
Advocating for Neutrality
Saylor frames the discourse as a fight for the fundamental nature of Bitcoin. He argues that Bitcoin’s strength lies in its ability to handle disagreement through neutral governance rather than uniform agreement on all uses. He emphasizes the need for "guardians of neutrality" instead of "guardians of purity."
Saylor's views resonate with other prominent Bitcoin advocates like Blockstream's Adam Back and Jameson Lopp from Casa, who share similar reservations about BIP-110, contrasting sharply with its supporters. The mandatory miner signaling window for BIP-110 is set to open in August, with a target activation around September 1.
This critique comes as Saylor's firm, Strategy, transitions from a stance of never selling its Bitcoin holdings to a more active management strategy, suspending new Bitcoin acquisitions to raise cash reserves for stock dividends and debt obligations. The firm currently holds about $3 billion in cash reserves. Recent predictions indicate that users on the Myriad platform now believe there is only an 8% chance that Strategy will hold over 1 million BTC by year-end, down from 17% a week earlier.
