Bitcoin developer calls for removal of Luke Dashjr as BIP Editor

BIP Editor Murch has submitted a formal proposal to the Bitcoin Development Mailing List to remove Luke Dashjr as BIP Editor. As grounds, he cites Dashjr’s role in the creation of BIP110, which led to a controversial fork of the Bitcoin network, and a series of violations of the established editorial procedures.

In brief:

• Murch is asking via the official mailing list for the dismissal of Luke Dashjr as BIP Editor.
• Dashjr is said to have used his editorial powers inconsistently during the creation of BIP110.
• Mutual trust and communication between Dashjr and the other BIP Editors have completely broken down.

Violations of the editorial process

In his submission, Murch states that Dashjr played a major role in drafting and implementing BIP110, the proposal that ultimately resulted in a fork of Bitcoin. During that process, Dashjr is said to have used his position as BIP Editor in an unauthorised manner. For example, he tried to assign a BIP number to the proposal via X before it had even been discussed on the mailing list. He also processed a so-called pull request within minutes of its submission, without following the usual procedure.

Notably, Dashjr was otherwise hardly active as BIP Editor. Since the appointment of new editors in April 2024, less than 1% of the responses in the repository have come from him, and the aforementioned merge was his first such action since May 2024. The BIP110 fork, incidentally, has only 0.15% of Bitcoin’s hash power behind it.

Trust completely gone

Murch indicates that collaboration with Dashjr has been strained for some time. Last year, communication was already damaged after a discussion about an earlier attempt by Dashjr to assign a BIP number outside the official procedure. Since then, contact between Dashjr and the rest of the team has not recovered.

On the basis of all these points, Murch concludes that there are serious doubts about Dashjr’s suitability for the role. He points to the inconsistent use of his editorial powers, his limited contribution to daily work, his involvement in a fork that runs counter to the direction of the Bitcoin ecosystem, and the loss of trust and coordination with his fellow editors.

The matter is attracting considerable attention within the Bitcoin developer community. Whether Murch’s proposal will actually be implemented remains to be seen through the further process on the mailing list.