If Bitcoin starts banning transaction patterns because some participants judge their purpose to be socially ugly, politically offensive, or aesthetically wasteful, neutrality stops being a property of the base layer and becomes a temporary mood.
Why Neutrality Matters
Bitcoin is strongest when the network validates according to simple, stable rules rather than subjective intent. Users do not need permission to transact, build, store value, experiment, or annoy one another. That is not a bug in the system. It is the system's defense against arbitrary gatekeeping.
Why BIP-110 Changes the Ground Rules
BIP-110 is not just a complaint about congestion or fees. It is an attempt to encode a judgment: some uses of blockspace are legitimate, others are not. Once that premise is accepted, future fights become easier to launch. The precedent matters more than the first target.
The Slippery Slope Is Real Here
If one class of transactions can be singled out for consensus intervention, later campaigns can cite that intervention as proof that the principle is already settled. Today's target might be inscriptions. Tomorrow's target could be mixers, vaults, covenant-like patterns, or any other unpopular use.
Better Alternative
If people dislike a use of blockspace, they can refuse to relay it, refuse to build products around it, refuse to market it, or outcompete it economically. Those are all softer and more local responses than changing the consensus social contract around acceptable usage.