Samson Mou, a bitcoin supporter and well-known entrepreneur, expressed the opinion that the BIP-110 proposal was largely a reaction to decisions and behavior within the Bitcoin Core ecosystem. His comments came as part of a wide-ranging discussion that also included analyst Michael Sullivan, Bitcoin Core developer Antoine Poinsot, and Blockstream co-founder Adam Back.

Mou appealed directly to the developers, stating that without acknowledging his own responsibility for the emergence of the BIP-110 movement, such conflicts would repeat themselves. According to the bitcoin maximalist, aggressive attacks by the opposing camp naturally provoked a subsequent negative reaction from opponents. He noted that representatives of one of the parties were equally vicious in their attacks, especially given their close ties to prominent and controversial figures in the industry. Mou wondered if the developers hadn't imagined that the accumulated anger and malice would return tenfold.

The problem was further compounded by several controversial issues, among which Mou highlighted the unworthy actions of individual industry representatives and a long list of other clumsy erroneous steps. The entrepreneur holds the view that the developers of bitcoin should have simply left the OP_RETURN function alone for a year or two, until the general situation in the community calmed down. Proponents of limiting arbitrary data on the network argue that the limited block space of bitcoin should primarily be used exclusively for monetary transactions. It was this fundamental disagreement that led to the creation of a new fork of bitcoin. However, recently this alternative project suffered a complete failure due to the extremely low level of implementation and lack of support from the miners. The industry continues to closely monitor the development of internal social conflicts in the largest cryptocurrency network.