Urgent Bitcoin Core Fork Threat Looms Over Ordinals and Censorship Concerns

An urgent and significant debate is unfolding within the Bitcoin community. This controversy centers on the very nature of the network and its fundamental principle of censorship resistance. A prominent developer in the Bitcoin Ordinals ecosystem has issued a stark warning. Leonidas, a leader in the Ordinals community, stated that his supporters would fund an open-source fork of Bitcoin Core if developers attempted to restrict non-financial transactions. This includes Ordinals, Runes, and other data-rich entries on the blockchain.

The Escalating Debate: Bitcoin Ordinals and Censorship Resistance

The core of this conflict lies in differing interpretations of Bitcoin’s purpose. Some members of the Bitcoin community, including Blockstream CEO Adam Back, view transactions like pictures, videos, or documents as ‘spam.’ They argue that node validators should prioritize peer-to-peer financial transactions. Consequently, they believe large data transactions should be censored or at least ignored. Leonidas, however, vehemently opposes this view. He issued an open letter on X, warning against setting a ‘dangerous precedent.’ Any tightening of policy rules or censorship of Ordinals and Runes Protocol transactions would, he asserted, trigger ‘decisive action.’

Leonidas emphasized the community’s resolve. He stated, “If necessary, the DOG Army will fund the development and maintenance of an open source fork of Bitcoin Core that strips out nearly all policy rules, and that thousands of people will run to make it abundantly clear that Bitcoin is and must always remain censorship resistant.” This declaration highlights the deep philosophical divide. It also underscores the commitment of Ordinals proponents to maintaining an open and permissionless blockchain.

Bitcoin Core vs. Bitcoin Knots: A Deepening Divide

This contentious debate unfolds against a backdrop of evolving technical developments. Bitcoin Core, the primary software client for the Bitcoin network, is nearing its v30 release, scheduled for October 30. This update is crucial. It plans to remove the 80-byte limit on the OP_RETURN function. This change would allow for significantly more media files and data to be stored directly on the blockchain. However, fears persist within the Ordinals community that developers might overturn this critical update. This concern fueled Leonidas’s recent warning.

Meanwhile, an alternative client, Bitcoin Knots, has seen a notable increase in adoption. Its node count surged from 67 in March 2024 to over 4,380 today. This represents more than 18% of the entire network. This growth suggests a segment of the community already seeks alternatives to Bitcoin Core. Many of these users likely align with a more permissive view of blockchain transactions. Figures like Ocean Mining creator Luke Dashjr and Satoshi Action Fund CEO Dennis Porter, however, support Adam Back’s stance. They advocate for stricter transaction policies. This ongoing disagreement underscores the fundamental tension within the Bitcoin ecosystem regarding its future direction.

Strengthening the Bitcoin Network: The Role of Transaction Fees

Beyond philosophical arguments, economic considerations play a significant role in this debate. Leonidas strongly argues that the Ordinals and Runes ecosystems have substantially contributed to Bitcoin’s security budget. Specifically, he highlighted over $500 million in transaction fees generated by these protocols. This financial contribution is increasingly vital as the Bitcoin mining block subsidy continues to halve approximately every four years. Consequently, transaction fees become a more critical component of miner revenue. This revenue, in turn, secures the network. A robust fee market incentivizes miners to continue their operations. It helps them maintain the network’s integrity and security.

Furthermore, Leonidas reported engaging with Bitcoin miners directly. He stated that miners representing over 50% of Bitcoin’s hash rate would continue to accept any transaction. This acceptance, he clarified, depends only on the fees being competitive. This suggests that a significant portion of the mining community prioritizes economic incentives over ideological objections to certain transaction types. Therefore, the financial viability offered by Ordinals and Runes Protocol could be a key factor in ensuring the long-term security of the Bitcoin network, especially as block rewards diminish.

The Volatility of Bitcoin Network Fees from Ordinals Activity

Despite the significant contributions, relying solely on fees from Ordinals transactions presents challenges. Activity within the Ordinals ecosystem has shown clear seasonality and unpredictability. For instance, on August 31, Bitcoin miners earned a mere $3,060 from Ordinals. This figure represents a tiny fraction of the daily record of $9.99 million achieved on December 16, 2023. Data from Dune Analytics clearly illustrates this volatility. Even in 2025, the strongest daily total has not surpassed $1 million. This suggests that Ordinals may not consistently occupy as much blockspace as they once did. This fluctuating activity introduces an element of uncertainty for miners who depend on these fees.

The unpredictable nature of Ordinals-generated Bitcoin Network Fees raises questions about their long-term stability as a primary source of network security. While they offer substantial revenue spikes, their inconsistency could pose challenges for consistent miner profitability. This volatility underscores the ongoing discussion about Bitcoin’s long-term security budget. As the block subsidy continues to decrease, the network will increasingly rely on transaction fees. The debate over Ordinals and their place on the blockchain is therefore not just about censorship; it’s also about the economic sustainability and future security model of Bitcoin itself.

Navigating the Future of Bitcoin’s Censorship Resistance

Ultimately, the threat of a Bitcoin Core fork by Ordinals developers highlights a critical juncture for the world’s leading cryptocurrency. The community must address fundamental questions about Bitcoin’s identity and purpose. Will it remain a strictly financial ledger, or will it embrace its potential as a more versatile data layer? Leonidas’s warning serves as a powerful reminder. It emphasizes that censorship resistance is not merely a technical feature but a core philosophical tenet for many users. The outcome of this debate could profoundly shape the future development and adoption of the Bitcoin network.

The potential for a fork, while a drastic measure, reflects the deep convictions held by different factions within the Bitcoin ecosystem. The decision regarding the v30 update and the broader policy on non-financial transactions will undoubtedly have lasting implications. It will affect not only the technical architecture but also the social contract that governs Bitcoin. The coming months will reveal whether compromise can be reached or if the community will face a more significant division over the very essence of Bitcoin’s decentralized and permissionless nature.