Bitcoin spam fight escalates as Dashjr backs BIP-110

Bitcoin developer Luke Dashjr has rejected calls to withdraw BIP-110, a disputed proposal that aims to limit non-financial data on Bitcoin. 

The proposal has renewed debate over whether the network should only process money transfers or also support data-heavy uses such as Ordinals and Runes.

Dashjr wrote, “Saylor didn’t say anything about BIP110.” He added, “And no, it’s too late to cancel BIP110.” His comment came after fresh debate around Michael Saylor’s view that Bitcoin should change slowly and protect its core design.

BIP-110, also called the Reduced Data Temporary Softfork, seeks to place temporary limits on certain forms of arbitrary data in Bitcoin transactions. The proposal’s text says it aims to move Bitcoin back toward “the world’s money” by rejecting data storage as a supported use case at the consensus level.

The official BIP-110 page says the new rules would apply only to UTXOs created at or after activation. It also says older UTXOs would remain exempt, meaning the proposal is designed to avoid freezing coins created before activation.

Ordinals and Runes sit at the center

The dispute centers on block space. Supporters of BIP-110 argue that inscriptions, Runes and other data-heavy activity raise storage demands and push Bitcoin away from peer-to-peer payments.

The BIP-110 GitHub text says the change would temporarily invalidate some methods of data storage while preserving known monetary use cases. Supporters frame that as a way to reduce spam and protect Bitcoin’s core purpose.

Critics argue that Bitcoin block space should remain open to any user willing to pay the required fee. They say attempts to restrict transaction content could create a harmful precedent and split users over subjective rules.

Runes and Ordinals have become part of Bitcoin’s fee market. The Ordinals handbook describes Runes as Bitcoin-native digital commodities that can be etched, minted and transferred through Bitcoin transactions.

Saylor’s comments add context

The debate also followed Michael Saylor’s latest comments on Bitcoin’s role. Saylor said Bitcoin is not a technology stock, payments company, or software platform competing to add features. 

“Its purpose is not to move fast and break things. Its purpose is to move slowly and not break,” he said.

Saylor did not directly mention BIP-110 in that post. Dashjr pointed this out while rejecting the idea that Saylor’s statement should lead to the proposal being withdrawn.

Crypto.news recently reported that Saylor’s company, Strategy, has faced pressure as Bitcoin weakened and its funding model came under closer review. In one analysis, crypto.news covered how Strategy’s Bitcoin flywheel began spinning in reverse as its market value fell below its Bitcoin holdings.

Moreover, Bitcoin stayed under pressure near $64,000 as ETF outflows and macro risks weighed on traders. That market stress gives the protocol debate a sharper backdrop.

Bitcoin users face another governance test

BIP-110 has become another test of Bitcoin governance. The network does not rely on a central authority to approve rule changes. Developers can propose changes, but users, miners, node operators and businesses decide what software they run.

That makes support levels important. If a proposal lacks broad backing, it may fail to activate or create confusion among users who run different rules. Reports from other outlets have said miner support remains weak, but the final outcome depends on signaling and user behavior before the activation window.

Crypto.news has covered Bitcoin’s recent pressure from several angles, including ETF outflow streaks and weaker investor demand during market stress. The BIP-110 fight adds a technical layer to that wider market story.