Saylor detailed “110 reasons” against the temporary “Reduced Data” soft fork, arguing it would restrict non-financial data on Bitcoin and set a precedent for content-based limits at the consensus layer.
Lyn Alden and Michael Saylor have criticized Bitcoin Improvement Proposal 110, arguing it should not be treated as an urgent Bitcoin emergency and warning its “Reduced Data” approach could create harmful restrictions on what may be stored on the blockchain. Alden said supporters shift between presenting BIP 110 as an urgent anti-spam response and as a narrower temporary measure, while Saylor on July 18-19 published a long essay and social media thread laying out “110 reasons” to oppose the proposal. BIP 110 would temporarily tighten Bitcoin’s data rules by capping outputs at 34 bytes, restoring an 83-byte limit on OP_RETURN outputs and invalidating data strings above 256 bytes, measures aimed at curbing data-heavy uses such as Ordinals. Saylor argues the network’s neutrality should not be altered to judge transaction content and warns that even a temporary soft fork could create a precedent for broader content-based restrictions, while also potentially hindering BitVM-style contracting. The dispute reflects a broader 2026 Bitcoin debate over spam, block space, openness and censorship resistance, with low miner signaling suggesting BIP 110 faces a difficult path to activation.