Stablecoin

Core

Life

Adam Back

<ul>
 <li>Michael Saylor argued BIP 110 risks Bitcoin’s consensus rules, while warning protocol-level filtering creates a governance precedent with lasting consequences.</li>
 <li>Adam Back defended Bitcoin’s permissionless design, arguing decentralization prevents transaction policing and warning forced changes could split the network.</li>
 <li>The debate expanded beyond spam concerns, with critics rejecting funding influence claims and emphasizing consensus stability over protocol-level transaction filtering.</li>
</ul>
&nbsp; 
Strategy founder<a href="https://36crypto.com/michael-saylor-executive-chairman-of-microstrategy/" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow"> Michael Saylor</a> has criticized Bitcoin Improvement Proposal 110, arguing that the proposal threatens Bitcoin’s long-standing principles more than the spam issue it seeks to address. His comments have added momentum to an ongoing debate over whether protocol-level filtering belongs in the Bitcoin network. 
BIP 110 proposes rejecting transactions classified as spam at the protocol level. The proposal primarily targets arbitrary data, including digital artifacts and tokens, embedded in Bitcoin transactions. Supporters argue the measure would reduce unnecessary blockchain activity. However, critics warn it could alter Bitcoin’s permissionless design. 
<a href="https://x.com/saylor/status/2075981482154209664" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">According to Saylor</a>, the proposal turns a disagreement over spam into a consensus change that invalidates transactions currently accepted by the network. He argued that such a move introduces a precedent that could affect future protocol decisions. 
“There are 110 things more dangerous to Bitcoin than spam,” Saylor wrote on X. He also stressed that Bitcoin should reserve consensus changes for threats that genuinely endanger the network instead of disputes over transaction content. 
Also Read: <a href="https://36crypto.com/jeremy-allaire-early-life-and-net-worth-the-circle-ceo-driving-stablecoin-innovation/" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">Jeremy Allaire: Early Life and Net Worth – The Circle CEO Driving Stablecoin Innovation</a> 
<h2 id="strong-back-says-decentralization-should-not-police-user-behavior-strong">Back says decentralization should not police user behavior</h2>
Blockstream co-founder and Hashcash inventor Adam Back also opposed BIP 110, saying the proposal conflicts with Bitcoin’s decentralized architecture. According to Back, permissionless systems cannot function if participants attempt to impose their preferences on everyone else. 
He acknowledged that spam remains an issue. However, he argued that protocol rules should not become tools for deciding which transactions deserve inclusion. Instead, users should retain the freedom to run software that reflects their own preferences without forcing those rules on others. 
According to Back, Bitcoin’s decentralized model <a href="https://36crypto.com/michael-saylor-says-bitcoins-four-year-cycle-ends-as-institutions-take-over-now/" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">protects the network by preventing</a> any individual or group from controlling acceptable transaction activity. Consequently, he warned that introducing protocol-level filters would weaken one of Bitcoin’s most important characteristics. 
Back also cautioned that adopting BIP 110 without broad consensus could split the Bitcoin network. He said anyone determined to enforce different rules remains free to launch a separate blockchain instead of changing Bitcoin’s existing consensus. 
Besides criticizing the proposal, Back dismissed claims that outside organizations control Bitcoin Core developers through funding. According to him, grants supporting Bitcoin development come without conditions attached. He added that donors generally do not influence technical priorities or direct developers’ work. 
The debate has therefore expanded beyond spam transactions into a broader discussion about governance. Supporters view BIP 110 as a way to reduce unwanted blockchain data. Meanwhile, opponents argue that changing consensus rules over transaction content creates risks that outweigh the proposal’s intended benefits. 
<h2 id="strong-conclusion-strong">Conclusion</h2>
BIP 110 has become a debate over Bitcoin’s governance as much as its transaction policies. Saylor and Back maintain that preserving decentralization and stable consensus rules should remain the network’s priority. Both argue that protocol-level filtering introduces a precedent that could influence future Bitcoin upgrades far beyond the current spam discussion. 
Also Read: ‘<a href="https://36crypto.com/unsavable-legal-advice-nearly-ended-ripple-david-schwartz-reveals/" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">Unsavable’ Legal Advice Nearly Ended Ripple, David Schwartz Reveals</a> 
The post <a href="https://36crypto.com/saylor-warns-bip-110-sets-dangerous-precedent-for-bitcoin-governance/" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">Saylor warns BIP 110 sets dangerous precedent for Bitcoin governance</a> appeared first on <a href="https://36crypto.com" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">36Crypto</a>.

Saylor warns BIP 110 sets dangerous precedent for Bitcoin governance

Table of Contents

36crypto

Other articles published on Jul 12, 2026

Join our free newsletter for daily crypto updates!