Bitcoin BIP-110 Ordinals Proposal Draws Strong Criticism from Michael Saylor and Adam Back

Prominent figures in the Bitcoin ecosystem, MicroStrategy Executive Chairman Michael Saylor and Blockstream CEO Adam Back, have publicly opposed Bitcoin Improvement Proposal 110 (BIP-110), sparking a significant debate. This controversial proposal seeks to restrict non-monetary data, such as Ordinals inscriptions, on the Bitcoin blockchain. Although Saylor and Back are both critical of Ordinals activity itself, they expressed deep concern that a protocol-level intervention of this nature could undermine Bitcoin's fundamental trustworthiness and decentralization.

BIP-110 was initially proposed in December 2025 by the pseudonymous Bitcoin developer Dathon Ohm, with support from Luke Dashjr, founder of the Ocean protocol. Its stated intent is to prevent NFT-like Ordinals inscriptions, BRC-20 tokens, and Runes from congesting the network as "spam," thereby preserving Bitcoin's primary function as a peer-to-peer electronic cash system. The proposal is designed as a temporary (one-year) soft fork and includes seven consensus rules that cap output sizes and data fields. However, for BIP-110 to activate, it requires support from 55% of block-validating nodes, but current node signaling remains at a mere 1%, making its activation highly unlikely.

Michael Saylor, in a post on X (formerly Twitter), asserted, "There are 110 things more dangerous to Bitcoin than spam," cautioning that BIP-110 could risk invalidating even regular transactions and thus damaging the network's credibility. Adam Back offered a more fundamental philosophical critique, characterizing BIP-110 as "a quest to police other people" and arguing it directly contradicts Bitcoin's cypherpunk ethos of decentralization, permissionlessness, and censorship resistance. Back warned that forcing such a change could lead to a chain split, a scenario where the network divides into competing versions with different consensus rules. Both leaders agree that introducing subjective rules at the protocol level would set a dangerous precedent and erode the network's predictability.

This dispute unfolds despite a significant downturn in Ordinals activity. Daily Ordinals inscriptions have plummeted from their peak of over 400,000 in August 2023 to fewer than 10,000 recently. This sharp decline weakens the argument for the urgent need for a contentious fix like BIP-110. Ordinals enable the storage of text, images, and other data by inscribing them onto individual satoshis on the Bitcoin network, and had previously contributed to increased transaction fees and block space demand.

The debate surrounding BIP-110 underscores a recurring philosophical divide within the Bitcoin community regarding the blockchain's fundamental purpose. It is considered one of the most notable protocol-level disputes since the "Blocksize Wars" of 2015-2017. On one side, there are concerns about data bloat and increased transaction fees; on the other, a strong desire to uphold the core principles of a censorship-resistant and permissionless network.

Analysts and market observers widely anticipate that BIP-110's activation is highly improbable given the minimal node support. This suggests that no major changes to Bitcoin's protocol are expected in the short term. However, discussions about the role of "non-monetary" uses like Ordinals in Bitcoin's future are likely to persist, as the community continues to grapple with finding a consensus on these foundational issues. This philosophical tension remains a key aspect of Bitcoin's ongoing evolution.