[Digital Today reporter Yoonseo Lee] Legendary investor Samson Mow pointed to decision-making and response methods within the Bitcoin Core ecosystem as the reason the BIP-110 movement spread.

On Aug. 12 local time, blockchain media outlet U.Today reported that Mow made the claim in a recent post on X, formerly Twitter, after a back-and-forth among analyst Michael Sullivan (마이클 설리번), Bitcoin Core developer Antoine Poinsot (앙투안 푸앵소) and Blockstream co-founder Adam Back (아담 백).

At the heart of the dispute is why opposition to BIP-110 grew. Addressing Poinsot, Mow said the same thing would happen again if he did not acknowledge responsibility for triggering the BIP-110 movement. He added, "All of this chaos could have been avoided," and argued the Core camp was not free of responsibility for how the controversy formed.

Mow said in particular that the opposing camp's aggressive posture later brought a bigger backlash. He said some Core developers had close ties with people who vent anger and abuse, such as Bitcoin Magazine's Brian, and that the resulting pushback was predictable.

As factors that fueled the controversy, Mow cited what he calls the 'Zhao-Newbery incident' and clumsy responses. Mow also did not accept assessments that criticism he raised in the past amounted to defamation. He said he only hinted at structural problems within Core, and that Jon Atack later publicly ignited the issue.

The latest clash also intersects with conflict over policy on OP_RETURN data capacity and relay limits, which allow arbitrary data to be recorded in transactions. Mow said the situation could have calmed and the current turmoil could have been avoided if OP_RETURN had been left as it was for 1 to 2 years. His logic is based on a distinction between default policy settings and consensus rules. He said everyone knew it was only a default, so there was no practical difference whether it was changed or not.

Issues in the market and the community extend to what Bitcoin block space should be prioritised for. Those who say arbitrary data storage should be restricted argue scarce block space should be used first for monetary transactions. Amid this trend, a new Bitcoin fork also emerged but recently failed because of adoption rate problems.

The BIP-110 controversy is now spreading into questions over Bitcoin Core's decision-making methods and how it manages community conflict. If policy discussions over OP_RETURN resume, internal trust and response methods within the ecosystem are increasingly likely to remain a bigger variable than technical necessity.

If you don't take responsibility for your own hand in directly spawning the BIP-110 movement, it will just happen again. Maybe you can't see it, but your "side" was just as nasty in its attacks, especially given you and other Core devs' close association with angry… https://t.co/Kw4oS6UsJd