Saylor, Back Oppose Bitcoin BIP-110 Ordinals Proposal as Fork Risk Grows
Michael Saylor and Adam Back have publicly opposed Bitcoin Improvement Proposal 110 (BIP-110), a temporary soft fork designed to restrict non-monetary transaction data including Ordinals inscriptions, citing censorship risks and potential network credibility damage[1][2]. The opposition, renewed on July 12, 2026, underscores a deepening governance fault line in Bitcoin between preserving its monetary focus and maintaining a permissionless, neutral settlement layer[1][3]. With miner signaling at near-zero levels and activation projected for September 1, 2026, the proposal faces significant hurdles to consensus[2][5].
Overview
- Opposition leaders: Strategy Executive Chairman Michael Saylor and Blockstream CEO Adam Back rejected BIP-110 on July 12, 2026[1][2].
- Proposal goal: BIP-110 aims to cap data pushes and restrict Taproot features to curb “arbitrary data” associated with Ordinals-like inscriptions[1][2].
- Activation threshold: The fork requires 55% miner signaling (1,109 of 2,016 blocks) during a mandatory window before block 963,648[1][2].
- Current support: Miner signaling stood at approximately 0-1% in the last evaluated period (period 475), with no major mining pool supporting the proposal[2][5].
- Timeline: Mandatory signaling begins near block 961,632 (August 2026), with activation targeted for block 965,664 (~Sept. 1, 2026)[1][2].
- Duration: Enforcement would expire after 52,416 blocks, roughly one year post-activation[1].
Subscribe to our Social Media for Exclusive Crypto News and Insights 24/7!
Saylor and Back’s Core Arguments
Saylor characterized BIP-110 as converting a “spam dispute into a consensus intervention” that could invalidate valid, fee-paying transactions currently accepted by the Bitcoin network[1][2]. He warned that such a precedent is “extremely dangerous” and argued developers should prioritize larger systemic threats over arbitrary data restrictions[2].
Back echoed these concerns, stating the plan attempts to “police transactions that other users choose to send,” which conflicts with Bitcoin’s decentralized and permissionless design[2]. He further warned that supporters might create a separate chain if they enforce rules without broad agreement, increasing fork risk[2].
| Argument | Saylor’s View | Back’s View |
|---|---|---|
| Core Issue | Turns spam debate into consensus change | Polices user-chosen transactions |
| Risk | Invalidates valid transactions | Conflicts with permissionless design |
| Precedent | “Extremely dangerous” | Could trigger separate chain creation |
| Focus | Developers should address larger threats | Network credibility at stake |
Sources: [1][2]
Technical Scope of BIP-110
BIP-110, titled “Reduced Data Temporary Softfork,” would apply seven additional consensus rules for approximately one year[1]. The specification caps most new output scripts at 34 bytes, permits OP_RETURN outputs up to 83 bytes, and limits data pushes to 256 bytes[1][2]. It also restricts Taproot annexes, control blocks, and selected Tapscript functions used to embed images or files in transactions[1][2].
The proposal grandfathered unspent transaction outputs created before activation, ensuring pre-existing Ordinals inscriptions remain valid[1]. However, nodes enforcing BIP-110 would reject blocks that do not signal support during the mandatory window, creating a hard enforcement mechanism[1].
Governance and Miner Signaling Reality
The activation process relies on a modified signaling threshold: 55% of miners must support the proposal during a defined block period[1][2]. Recent data shows only about 1% of blocks in period 475 (blocks 955,584-957,599) signaled BIP-110 support[5]. No major mining pool has endorsed the proposal, and signaling remains far below the required threshold[2].
Analysts note that weak miner signaling raises concerns about a divided network if the proposal is pushed without broad consensus[1]. The next test period begins near block 961,632 in August 2026, marking the final window for mandatory signaling before activation[1][2].
Market and Governance Implications
This dispute places Bitcoin’s monetary focus against its permissionless design, a recurring tension in Bitcoin governance[1]. Supporters view BIP-110 as a short-term defense against network bloat from Ordinals-like data, while opponents see it as an unnecessary risk to network credibility and user safety[4][5].
Ordinals activity has reportedly fallen sharply from its August 2023 peak, raising questions about whether a contentious fix is needed now[5]. Market participants view the low signaling as a signal that the proposal lacks sufficient community backing, potentially delaying or killing the fork entirely[2].
Risks and Uncertainties
A key downside scenario is that supporters of BIP-110 could enforce the rules unilaterally, triggering a chain split and creating a separate Bitcoin chain[2]. This would fragment liquidity, confuse users, and damage Bitcoin’s reputation as a neutral settlement layer.
Uncertainty remains over whether the proposal will be revised to address censorship concerns or abandoned entirely given the near-zero miner support[2][5]. If the threshold is not met, the fork will not activate, but the governance debate may intensify.
The outcome of this dispute will likely influence future Bitcoin governance approaches, particularly regarding protocol-level interventions to manage non-monetary data[4]. Whether Bitcoin prioritizes monetary purity or permissionless neutrality may define its competitive positioning in the coming years.
- https://www.kucoin.com/news/flash/bitcoin-bip-110-faces-opposition-from-saylor-and-adam-back
- https://crypto.news/adam-back-and-michael-saylor-oppose-bip-110-as-fork-risk-grows/
- https://cointelegraph.com/news/bitcoin-leaders-michael-saylor-and-adam-back-rebuff-bip-110-proposal
- https://www.instagram.com/p/DarqWXeCn7D/
- https://www.facebook.com/100069623704174/posts/saylor-and-adam-back-criticize-bip-110-ordinals-proposal7-minutes-agonews-feedgo/1321020123562099/
- https://cointelegraph.com.br/news/bitcoin-leaders-michael-saylor-and-adam-back-rebuff-bip-110-proposal
- https://www.blocktempo.com/saylor-adam-back-oppose-bip-110-ordinals/
