One thing that strikes me about the current BIP110 debate is how much the social dynamics remind me of COVID. Not because the subject matter is the same, but because the pattern feels familiar. You have a large number of recognised experts, influencers and institutions all pushing the same narrative. You have legitimate concerns and counterarguments that often go unanswered. And you have people raising those concerns being characterised as troublemakers, extremists, attackers or simply not understanding the issue. During COVID, many people weren't asking for blind trust in alternative views. They were simply asking for open debate, transparency and the right to question the prevailing narrative. Whether you agreed with them or not, questioning authority became enough to attract criticism. I see some of the same frustrations emerging here.For many of us, the issue isn't whether a particular developer, company or influencer is good or bad. The issue is that Bitcoin was designed specifically so that nobody's authority should be enough. Arguments should stand or fall on their merits. When concerns about incentives, funding, governance, adoption, miner behaviour or Bitcoin's use as money are raised, they should be addressed directly rather than dismissed because of who is asking them. That's why I respect the people who continue asking difficult questions. Not because they're necessarily right about everything, but because Bitcoin depends on open scrutiny and healthy skepticism. The answer isn't insults, tribalism or hero worship. The answer is to run a node, study the proposals, support decentralisation, verify claims for yourself and participate in the process.Bitcoin doesn't need followers. It needs sovereign individuals. If the debate around BIP110 has achieved anything positive, it's that more people are looking behind the curtain and asking how Bitcoin development is funded, how influence is exercised and whether the incentives still align with Bitcoin's original purpose. Those are questions worth asking, regardless of where you stand on the proposal.