Summary
- Michael Saylor shared a nine-part thread on X, asserting that Bitcoin's consensus rules act as a "constitution" and labeling any attempts to alter them as economic theft.
- His remarks extended beyond BIP-110, encompassing covenants and larger-block proposals, which he termed "different instruments, same constitutional offense."
- The mandatory signaling window for BIP-110 is set to commence around August 9, at block 961,632, with current miner support at only 2.64%, significantly below the 55% needed for activation.
Michael Saylor has shifted his focus from opposing BIP-110 to contesting any alterations to Bitcoin's code. On Tuesday, he published a series of nine posts on X, framing the ongoing protocol discussions as a constitutional crisis.
"Bitcoin has won. Now it must survive victory," Saylor stated on X. "Its most significant threat is not external foes, but internal corruption: factions that create justifications, modify the rules, and usurp economic rights until freedom becomes mere permission and law becomes a tool for theft."
Previously, Saylor targeted a specific Bitcoin Improvement Proposal known as BIP-110, which proposes a "Reduced Data Temporary Softfork" that would limit non-financial data, such as Ordinals inscriptions, on Bitcoin's blockchain for about a year. Last week, he released a 110-point essay opposing the proposal, titled "110 Reasons BIP 110 Is a Bad Idea."
Given the current status of BIP-110, Saylor's perspective seems to have gained traction. He now associates BIP-110 with covenants—smart contract-like restrictions that allow users to pre-determine how their Bitcoin can be spent—and proposals for larger blocks, which aim to increase the amount of data per block for processing more transactions. His conclusion: different ideas, same wrongdoing.
Bitcoin has won. Now it must survive victory.
Its most significant threat is not an enemy at the gates, but corruption from within: factions that create justifications, modify the rules, and seize economic rights until freedom becomes permission and law becomes loot.
— Michael Saylor (@saylor) July 28, 2026
"Some proposals, such as BIP-110, censor legitimate fee-paying transactions. Others introduce covenant mechanisms. Others advocate for larger blocks," he noted. "Different instruments, same constitutional offense: a faction rewrites Bitcoin's rules and imposes its agenda, costs, and risks on everyone."
This constitutional analogy plays a crucial role in Saylor's argument. He likens Bitcoin's consensus rules—the agreed-upon standards that nodes and miners follow to validate transactions—to a nation's founding laws. He contends that rewriting these rules to suit any faction's ideological agenda is not merely software updating; it constitutes a violation of people's economic rights.
"Bitcoin's consensus rules are its constitution," he asserted. "Altering them for the convenience of any group is an assault on the economic rights of every participant today and for generations to come."
"Changes to the protocol should be infrequent, cautious, and based on necessity rather than ambition. Protect Bitcoin's constitution. Safeguard the future," he added.
The main proponent of BIP-110 is its pseudonymous creator Dathon Ohm, with veteran Bitcoin developer Luke Dashjr significantly contributing to the original draft. The proposal is primarily backed by a small “anti-spam” faction within Bitcoin Knots and node operators who argue that Bitcoin should prioritize peer-to-peer transactions over acting as a permanent storage solution for elements like Ordinals, tokens, images, and other arbitrary data.
Supporters claim that while miners receive a one-time fee for accommodating such data, every full node operator must manage the long-term storage, bandwidth, and validation expenses. They argue that this is not censorship but rather a means to conserve a limited public resource (i.e., the blockchain’s capacity).
Obvious substantive flaws
It conflates three opposing policy paths. BIP-110 restricts specific data uses; covenants enhance functionality; larger blocks increase capacity. They do not represent a single coherent faction or agenda. The only commonality is that they propose change…
— Fred Krueger #BIP-110 (@dotkrueger) July 28, 2026
The mandatory signaling window for BIP-110—when nodes running the proposal’s software will start rejecting non-compliant blocks—will begin around August 9, at block 961,632. Current miner support is merely 2.64%, as per the BIP-110 signaling dashboard, which is far below the 55% threshold required for activation.