Image credit: Unsplash
Michael Saylor and Adam Back have pushed back against BIP-110, a Bitcoin proposal that would temporarily restrict some data-heavy transactions linked to Ordinals and other inscription activity.
Both figures have criticized blockchain spam, but said changing consensus rules to police non-monetary data could create a larger risk than the activity the proposal targets.
BIP-110 Targets Large Data Storage
BIP-110 is formally titled the Reduced Data Temporary Softfork. The proposal would temporarily invalidate several methods used to embed large amounts of arbitrary data in Bitcoin transactions.
That includes contiguous data larger than 256 bytes, large scriptPubKey and Tapleaf formats, and OP_RETURN outputs above an 83-byte limit. Supporters say the goal is to protect Bitcoin’s use as money by limiting block space used for NFTs, BRC-20-style tokens, Runes and other inscription formats.
Saylor Warns Against Rejecting Valid Transactions
Saylor said BIP-110 poses a greater threat to Bitcoin than spam because it could invalidate transactions that are otherwise valid and fee-paying. Saylor argued that Bitcoin’s credibility depends on users believing valid transactions will not be rejected based on purpose.
Back made a similar point. He described the proposal as an attempt to police other users and said Bitcoin’s cypherpunk design depends on permissionless, censorship-resistant use. Opponents say the issue is the remedy. They argue that market fees and non-consensus node policy are safer tools than a consensus fork that could divide the network.
Miner Signaling Remains Near 1%
BIP-110 still appears far from activation. The proposal uses a lower activation threshold than many past soft fork debates, requiring 55% miner signaling in a 2,016-block period.
Recent tracking cited in reports showed support near 1%, with earlier data putting signaling below 1% of hashrate.
A mandatory signaling window has also drawn criticism because some developers and Bitcoin advocates fear it could increase chain-split risk if support remains thin.
Low Support Keeps BIP-110 From Activation
The debate revives a long-running fight over whether Bitcoin should allow inscription-style data at the base layer. Ordinals and related token formats created new fee demand, but also angered users who see them as non-financial clutter on a monetary network.
BIP-110 tries to address that dispute through temporary consensus restrictions. Saylor and Back argue that those restrictions could damage Bitcoin’s neutrality more than inscriptions damage block space.
The next step is miner signaling. If support stays low, BIP-110 is likely to remain a protest proposal rather than a live network change.
