Michael Saylor, whose company holds more Bitcoin than many nations hold in gold, is publicly opposing a proposed change to the blockchain's rules.
The MicroStrategy executive chairman published a detailed essay listing 110 reasons against BIP-110. This proposal would temporarily restrict large non-financial data embeddings in Bitcoin transactions, effectively limiting what protocols like Ordinals can store on-chain.
The technical changes aim to curb what supporters call blockchain spam by capping data sizes. However, Saylor argues this violates Bitcoin's core principle of neutrality.
"The network processes transactions without judging their content," Saylor contends. He warns that introducing content-based restrictions, even temporary ones, sets a dangerous precedent for future consensus changes.
The debate intensifies what the community calls the "spam wars" of 2026-a philosophical clash over Bitcoin's identity as either a monetary network or a broader data platform. This echoes the contentious Blocksize Wars that previously split the community.
Miner support for BIP-110 remains notably low. Miners profit from all transaction fees, including those from data-heavy applications the proposal would restrict.
As the largest corporate Bitcoin holder, MicroStrategy's opposition carries significant weight, signaling to institutional investors that the network's conservative faction still has powerful advocates.