# Major Backlash Against BIP-110 Proposal in Bitcoin Saylor and Back oppose a fork proposal that could harm Bitcoin network's credibility. - **Source:** [Cointelegraph.com News](https://brifing.si/source/2e81e982-0137-4db0-8ac2-351f37085775) - **Published:** 2026-07-12 - **Topic:** [Finance](https://brifing.si/c/finance) - **Original article:** - **On Brifing:** https://brifing.si/s/03e09995-505d-405b-a3e5-15c8216b8aa7 ## What is BIP-110? Bitcoin Improvement Proposal-110 was introduced in December 2025 to prevent NFT-like Ordinals transactions and other arbitrary data from clogging the network. The proposal aims to preserve Bitcoin's core use as a peer-to-peer cash system. ## Opposing Views Michael Saylor and Adam Back argue that BIP-110 could damage the network's credibility. Saylor stated 'There are 110 things more dangerous than spam,' suggesting the proposal might invalidate ordinary transactions. ## Historical Context BIP-110 is one of the most notable protocol-level disputes in Bitcoin's developer community since the Block Size Wars of 2015-2017. The proposal is supported by a pseudonymous developer and the founder of Ocean protocol. ## Activation Chance BIP-110 requires support from 55% of Bitcoin block validators to activate. Recent data shows only 1% support, indicating low chances of adoption. ## Ordinals Activity The controversy emerges as Ordinals transactions hit record lows. Daily transactions fell from over 400,000 at their August 2023 peak to fewer than 10,000 recently. ## Bitcoin's Core Values Adam Back describes BIP-110 as a 'quest to police others,' incompatible with Bitcoin's cypherpunk ethos of permissionless money. Proponents argue Ordinals-driven bloat poses a serious network threat needing immediate action. ## Sources covering this story - https://cointelegraph.com/news/bitcoin-leaders-michael-saylor-and-adam-back-rebuff-bip-110-proposal?utm_source=rss_feed&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=rss_partner_inbound — --- _Summary written by Brifing from the original reporting. Copyright in the original article belongs to its publisher; read the full piece at the link above._