Michael Saylor and Adam Back post to oppose BIP 110, saying it could weaken Bitcoin’s decentralization and neutrality

Deep Tide TechFlow message: On July 12, Adam Back, co-founder of Blockstream, said in the Bitcoin community that, regarding the controversy surrounding BIP 110, although he understands the demands of those who support it—who want to curb spam transactions and protect the network—the proposal essentially carries a tendency toward interfering with and monitoring transaction behavior. It may undermine Bitcoin’s decentralization, security, and neutrality, and goes against the core spirit of Bitcoin.

Strategy founder Michael Saylor reposted related views, saying that BIP 110 would elevate the controversy over spam transactions into a change at the consensus layer, potentially making certain currently valid transactions that have already paid fees ineffective. This precedent itself is more risky than the spam-transaction issue, and the market should focus on more critical systemic threats.

In a prior message, David Bailey, chairman of Bitcoin Treasury company Nakamoto and president of Bitcoin Magazine, wrote that the failure of the so-called “BIP-110” long-running controversy event is, in terms of outcomes, “extremely positive” for Bitcoin, and that this further validates the network’s ability to withstand attacks and resist splits.