- Published on
Bitcoin bulls Michael Saylor, Adam Back slam BIP-110 Ordinals proposal
- Authors
- Name
- DeepHorus
Bitcoin industry heavyweights Michael Saylor and Adam Back have publicly criticized Bitcoin Improvement Proposal-110 (BIP-110), a proposed temporary fork aimed at curbing non-monetary transactions such as Ordinals inscriptions. The opposition from these influential figures highlights a deepening divide within the Bitcoin community over how to handle network bloat. BIP-110 was introduced in December 2025 by pseudonymous developer Dathon Ohm, with support from Ocean protocol founder Luke Dashjr.
The proposal seeks to limit arbitrary data on the blockchain, which proponents argue is spamming the network and undermining Bitcoin's primary function as a peer-to-peer cash system. This dispute is reminiscent of the Blocksize Wars between 2015 and 2017, when the community debated scalability and whether to risk a chain split. Despite the controversy, support for BIP-110 remains minimal.
In the most recent block period, period 475 between blocks 955,584 and 957,599, only 1% of blocks expressed support for the proposal. The debate comes at a time when Ordinals activity has plummeted, with fewer than 10,000 daily inscriptions over the last month, down sharply from a peak of over 400,000 in August 2023. These figures suggest that the perceived urgency may be waning.
Michael Saylor, executive chairman of Strategy, warned that the fork could do more harm than good. "There are 110 things more dangerous to Bitcoin than spam," he said in a post on X, adding that BIP-110 could invalidate ordinary transactions. Adam Back, CEO of Blockstream, offered a deeper critique, calling the proposal a "quest to police other people" and arguing that it contradicts Bitcoin's cypherpunk ethos of permissionless, censorship-resistant money.
Proponents of BIP-110, including Dashjr, view Ordinals-driven bloat as a serious threat requiring an urgent fix. They argue that the fork would not cause a permanent chain split, as the proposal includes a one-year time limit and would not invalidate fee-paying transactions over the long term. However, critics like Saylor and Back remain unconvinced, fearing unintended consequences.
Looking ahead, BIP-110 faces an uphill battle for activation, as it requires support from 55% of Bitcoin nodes. With current backing at just 1%, the proposal is a long shot. The declining Ordinals activity may reduce pressure for change, but the ideological rift over Bitcoin's purposeâas a store of value versus a platform for innovationâis likely to persist. This debate underscores the ongoing tension between preserving the network's original vision and adapting to new use cases.
