Samson Mow Revives Bitcoin XT Warning Amid Governance Battle

JAN3 chief executive Samson Mow has reopened a defining Bitcoin governance dispute, using the failed Bitcoin XT campaign to frame today’s protocol tensions. In a July 24 post, Mow said Gavin Andresen and Mike Hearn promoted BIP101 to miners after Core developers rejected it.

BIP101 proposed a contentious hard fork requiring 75% miner signaling, which critics feared could divide the network before broader agreement. Bitcoin XT already existed, but Hearn later added Andresen’s proposal and promoted the alternative client to mining pools.

BIP101’s 75% Miner Threshold Tested Bitcoin’s Consensus Model

According to reports, BIP101 would have lifted Bitcoin’s one-megabyte block limit to eight megabytes in January 2016. The maximum would then double every two years, reaching 8.192 gigabytes by 2036.

To activate the proposal, 750 of 1,000 consecutive blocks had to signal support, followed by a two-week grace period. At the time, Andresen argued that the 75% threshold would prevent one dominant mining pool from blocking the upgrade.

However, opponents warned that the same threshold could leave exchanges, businesses, miners, and full-node operators enforcing incompatible rules. The capacity debate therefore became a governance test. The issue was whether miners could trigger major rule changes without wider consensus.

Mow was directly involved in the debate in 2015. As BTCChina’s chief operating officer, he said Chinese miners would reject Bitcoin XT without developer agreement. Consequently, their combined hash power made the proposal’s activation threshold more difficult to reach.

Core-Knots Relay Policy Fight Revives Bitcoin Governance Debate

Mow’s latest warning now points toward the conflict between Bitcoin Core and Bitcoin Knots supporters. The disagreement partly centers on Core 30.0 and its updated OP_RETURN relay settings.

Core 30.0 raised the default>The distinction between the two disputes remains important. BIP101 proposed a consensus-changing hard fork, whereas the OP_RETURN update affects transaction relay and mining policy.

Therefore, Core and Knots can apply different mempool preferences while continuing to follow the same blockchain. This makes the current conflict technically different from the Bitcoin XT campaign, despite similar governance concerns.

Bitcoin XT ultimately failed to reach its activation threshold. Bitcoin later adopted Segregated Witness through a soft fork, while larger-block supporters launched Bitcoin Cash through a chain split in August 2017.

Nevertheless, the renewed debate shows why the earlier episode remains relevant. Bitcoin governance still depends on coordination among developers, miners, businesses, and node operators rather than code or hash power alone.

Related: Bitcoin Core Debate Intensifies as Transparency, Governance, and Developer Influence Face Scrutiny