Community Trust ScoreVerified
The ongoing debate over Bitcoin Core’s transaction relay policy has intensified after a prominent figure in the Bitcoin Ordinals ecosystem suggested a full-scale fork could occur if policy changes threaten Ordinals and Runes transactions.
Ordinals Leader Threatens Fork Over Policy Changes
Leonidas, host of The Ordinal Show and a key organizer in the Ordinals ecosystem, issued a warning in an open letter on September 6. He stated that any attempt to tighten default relay policies to the detriment of Ordinals or Runes transactions would be met with decisive action.
He further indicated that the “DOG Army” would fund an open-source fork of Bitcoin Core that removes most policy rules, ensuring thousands of nodes would maintain it to preserve Bitcoin’s censorship-resistant properties.
Leonidas argued that the Ordinals economy contributes significantly to the network, estimating more than $500 million in transaction fees to date. He claimed discussions with miners representing over 50% of Bitcoin’s hash rate indicate they would continue to include any consensus-valid transactions with competitive fees.
Core Policy Changes and the Mempool Debate
The dispute centers on Bitcoin Core v30, scheduled for October, and its policy changes regarding data-carrying transactions. In June, Core merged changes widening the “standardness” criteria:
-
Removing the 80-byte OP_RETURN cap and instead allowing block-size-limited payloads.
-
Relaying transactions with multiple OP_RETURN outputs by default.
These changes relate to mempool relay policy, not consensus rules, and aim to improve fee estimation, reduce reliance on alternative transaction submission methods, and better align node behavior with what miners actually include.
Critics argue that normalizing non-financial data in blocks could undermine the economic focus of Bitcoin, while proponents say the adjustments reflect real-world transaction demand and do not constitute censorship.
Bitcoin Core Developers Defend Policy Adjustments
Core developers, including Pieter Wuille, Gloria Zhao, and Greg Sanders, emphasized that transaction relay policy should support efficiency and reliability in validating and relaying transactions. They stated that deliberately refusing transactions with sustained economic demand could push users to alternative channels and weaken decentralization.
The developers clarified that this position does not endorse non-financial transactions, but rather recognizes that a censorship-resistant system will inevitably be used for activities beyond traditional monetary transfers.
Knots Implementation and Relay-Policy Alternatives
Luke Dashjr, maintainer of the Knots Bitcoin implementation, supports stricter default policies but denies this constitutes censorship. He encourages operators preferring tighter controls to run Knots nodes, while miners remain free to include any consensus-valid transactions.
Knots has seen a notable increase in adoption, now accounting for over 18% of publicly reachable Bitcoin nodes, according to Coin.Dance. This reflects growing interest in alternatives to Core as debates over relay policies continue.
Ordinals Leader Emphasizes Economic Impact
Leonidas highlighted that over twenty Bitcoin startups operating economically relevant nodes would welcome policy flexibility, allowing nodes to follow only consensus rules. He warned that filtering based on content—whether JPEGs, memecoins, or other inscriptions—sets a dangerous precedent comparable to state-level monetary censorship.
The argument reinforces a key distinction: Bitcoin Core software is not Bitcoin itself. Users decide which software to run, meaning that alternative implementations can coexist if policy disagreements arise.
Governance and Community Implications
The dispute underscores ongoing tensions in Bitcoin governance between developers, node operators, and the broader ecosystem. While Core developers manage the reference client, adoption of alternative software like Knots demonstrates that market consensus ultimately influences network behavior.
The upcoming Core v30 release and related policy adjustments are expected to intensify these debates. Analysts note that the Ordinals and Runes ecosystems have become economically significant, and any changes affecting them could have ripple effects across transaction activity and mempool dynamics.
Conclusion
The Bitcoin Core relay-policy debate illustrates the complexity of managing a decentralized network while maintaining censorship resistance and supporting innovation in transactions. The potential for an alternative fork highlights the importance of community consensus and the choices users have in determining which software governs their participation.
As Bitcoin approaches v30, developers, miners, and node operators face decisions that could shape the future of transaction policy and the broader balance between standard financial activity and emerging data-driven uses of the blockchain.
