A significant dispute has arisen within the Bitcoin community regarding BIP-110, which has emerged as one of the most hotly debated subjects concerning the leading cryptocurrency by March 2026.
For those unfamiliar with it, BIP-110 is a proposal aimed at enhancing Bitcoin, introduced by a developer known as Dathon Ohm in December 2025. Its primary objective is to restrict the amount of arbitrary data—including images and videos—being inscribed onto the blockchain via protocols like Ordinals and Runes.
The proposed solution involves implementing a temporary soft fork lasting 12 months to filter out spam at the consensus level.
Reasons Behind Opposition from Bitcoin Veterans
This situation brings forth significant complications. Adam Back, CEO of Blockstream and an individual referenced in Satoshi Nakamoto’s original white paper, along with other prominent figures such as Jameson Lopp and Wang Chun, have expressed strong opposition to BIP-110.
Their primary concern revolves around potential threats to network neutrality. Back argues that efforts to censor specific transaction types at this fundamental level could be more detrimental than spam itself—a problem he has been actively combating.
Another critical issue is the risk of asset confiscation. The proposal might render certain existing UTXOs unusable, effectively freezing users’ funds. Additionally, there’s a danger of fracturing the network; activating a soft fork without widespread consensus—suggesting only 55% agreement instead of the traditional requirement of 95%—could result in multiple branches emerging from the blockchain.
Well, one issue with BIP-110 is that it represents an intentional downgrade that disrupts user space. It freezes UTXOs, breaks miniscript functionality, disables OP_IF commands and removes upgrade hooks. Moreover, proposing a temporary soft fork seems unreasonable.
— Adam Back (@adam3us) March 15, 2026
Compounding this debate further was an accusation from another notable member of the Bitcoin community known as Hodlnaut who criticized Adam Back for his perceived arrogance and disregard for protocol governance issues.
BIP-110 may ultimately be remembered as a pivotal filter for Bitcoin’s future trajectory. Should it be rejected by users on this network it would reinforce its commitment against censorship; conversely if accepted BTC could take its first steps toward increased centralization where rules may shift according to prevailing interests or agendas.