Wrong. View quoted note →

ultimately without a coinciding ursf to bip110, the chainsplits cannot coexist. its just the same utxo set. functionally, you're not going to be able to interact with the network(s) properly as there would exist no mechanism to prevent your tx to not replay on all networks. the idea that a stalled bip110 attempt creates an opportunity for proponents to forward bitcoins to detractors is wishful thinking 😅 or possibly pure avarice

You’re hiding behind definitions. In the real world, a contested checkpoint forces a chain choice and locks in history, which is a split in everything but name. Calling it soft doesn’t change that.