Michael Saylor lists 110 reasons to reject BIP-110: Bitcoin doesn’t need a fork, and cleaning up blocks is stupid

Strategy’s founder Michael Saylor published a roughly 3,700-word long post on X, listing 110 reasons to point out the flaws of the BIP-110 temporary fork, announcing that the Bitcoin protocol civil war is escalating.
(Previously: BIP-110 blows up the Bitcoin civil war! Should inscriptions be limited? Adam Back erupts at “mob attacks,” and the 55% threshold is tearing the community apart)
(Background: Has the Bitcoin “civil war” ended? Attempts to acquire the BIP-110 adversary are underway, with supported hashrate currently at less than 1%)

Table of contents

Toggle

• What is BIP-110?
• The showdown between Saylor and Adam Back
• The silent exit of Ordinals
• The protocol war from 2015 to today

Known for founding Strategy (formerly MicroStrategy), whose treasury is famed for its massive Bitcoin holdings, Strategy founder Michael Saylor posted on X on Sunday a long article of about 3,700 words, listing “110 reasons” explaining the flaws of Bitcoin’s BIP-110 temporary fork.

“My shared goal, but a different view on the remedy.” Saylor said in the post, “Many Bitcoin supporters I respect endorse BIP-110. They want to keep validation accessible, protect node operators from unnecessary costs and content, and maintain affordable payments—so Bitcoin can focus on sound money rather than generalized data storage. These are all reasonable concerns. I agree with the goals, but I disagree with the solution.”

What is BIP-110?

BIP-110 is an improvement proposal put forward in December 2025 by anonymous Bitcoin developer Dathon Ohm. Its core demand is to limit Ordinals inscriptions of type-like NFTs and arbitrary data being stuffed into the Bitcoin network, keeping Bitcoin as the main peer-to-peer cash system function.

BIP-110’s mechanism applies a temporary one-year restriction on the Bitcoin blockchain, so that the same Bitcoin can carry only one inscription. While it sounds straightforward, this means that new blocks will “ignore” subsequent inscription transactions until they meet the conditions for validation.

Bitcoin’s rules are neutral, consensus is firm, the market is open, and innovation doesn’t need permission.

The showdown between Saylor and Adam Back

BIP-110 currently doesn’t look like it will activate anytime soon. For the proposal to take effect, 55% of Bitcoin validation nodes need to support it in the same block “cycle.” In the previous cycle (epoch 475, blocks 955,584 to 957,599), only 1% of blocks cast support votes.

Supporters of BIP-110 include Ocean Protocol founder Luke Dashjr, and Blockstream CEO Adam Back also criticized BIP-110 on X as “telling other people what to do,” pointing out that the meaning of Bitcoin’s decentralization is “you can’t impose your views on others,” which doesn’t align with Bitcoin’s permissionless, anti-censorship cypherpunk spirit.

Saylor’s post had already garnered 879k views, 692 replies, and 852 reposts by Sunday evening, showing the topic’s heat.

Ordinals’ silent exit

According to Dune Analytics data, over the past month the number of Ordinals inscriptions on the Bitcoin chain has fallen to fewer than 10,000 per day. Compared with the peak in August 2023, when it was over 400k per day, it has been reduced by more than 4 times.

The driving force behind the “inscription war” is the Ordinals protocol, which sparked the NFT craze in 2023 and transformed Bitcoin from “just saving money” into a general-purpose data layer. Now Ordinals activity is near a historical low point, but supporters of BIP-110 say that the data bloat brought by inscriptions is a potential threat to the network and needs to be fixed immediately.

The protocol war from 2015 to today

BIP-110 is one of the most prominent protocol-level disagreements among Bitcoin’s development community since the “block size war” from 2015 to 2017. At the time, participants risked chain splits rather than miss the chance to argue for expanding the block size limit.

Saylor’s 110 reasons cover multiple angles, from node costs, historical data, economic models, to protocol evolution. He concluded:

Bitcoin is at its most vibrant when we can debate fiercely without mistaking allies for enemies.

As the BIP-110 temporary fork is about to affect Bitcoin network validation logic, the pace of this protocol war is accelerating. Saylor’s 110 reasons may not be formal technical analysis, but his emphasis on Bitcoin’s core principles offers ordinary investors an entry point to understand this protocol war.