Michael Saylor Slams BIP-110, Calls Bitcoin “Anti-Spam” Proposal a Dangerous Precedent

Michael Saylor, executive chairman of Strategy and one of Bitcoin’s most prominent corporate advocates, has publicly criticized a new proposal aimed at limiting arbitrary data storage on the Bitcoin blockchain. In a detailed critique posted online, Saylor argued that Bitcoin Improvement Proposal 110, known as BIP-110, threatens the network’s core neutrality and could set a troubling precedent for future censorship.

Saylor’s main concern is that Bitcoin’s protocol was never designed to interpret intent behind the data it processes. He explained that the network cannot distinguish whether stored information represents an image, a contract, a proof, or any other type of data, meaning any attempt to filter “spam” effectively introduces human judgment into what should remain neutral protocol rules. He described this shift as reversing Bitcoin’s traditionally conservative approach to changes.

Proposal Would Temporarily Restrict Certain Data and Lower Approval Threshold

BIP-110 proposes a one-year temporary soft fork introducing several new consensus restrictions, including limits on data payload sizes and certain script executions, with the goal of keeping Bitcoin focused primarily on its role as sound, peer-to-peer money. Supporters view this as restoring Bitcoin’s original purpose, while critics see it as a step toward restricting legitimate uses of the network. One particularly contentious element would lower the miner approval threshold needed for future upgrades from the traditional 95% down to just 55%, a change Saylor called too aggressive and potentially destabilizing.

Warnings About Network Splits and Long-Term Risks

Saylor cautioned that lowering the consensus threshold could increase the likelihood of disagreement within the community, raising the risk of the network splitting into competing versions. He also warned of broader consequences, including reduced fee revenue if certain network uses are suppressed, which could weaken miner incentives over time as block rewards continue to decline, potentially affecting Bitcoin’s overall security.

Existing Tools Seen as Sufficient Alternative

Rather than modifying the blockchain’s underlying code, Saylor suggested that market-based transaction fees and individual node relay policies already provide adequate mechanisms for managing network capacity without altering Bitcoin’s fundamental consensus rules.