Luke Dashjr, Bitcoin developer and Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of CONVOY Mining, opened public discussion on two temporary reward rule ideas aimed at a group of hashers he says are securing blocks purely for profit while weakening the network’s decentralization.
The proposals, shared on X on Thursday, September 10, 2026, would either extend the wait before mined bitcoin can be spent or set the block subsidy to zero for one month. Dashjr followed up minutes later to stress that neither idea is final and that both would be temporary.
What Dashjr Wrote
In his first post at 09:09:47 UTC, Dashjr said mined bitcoin is currently unspendable for its first 100 blocks. He wrote, verbatim: “Mined bitcoins are unspendable for their first 100 blocks. There has been proposals to either delay spending them for 4375 blocks (~a month), or to zero the block subsidy for a month (so miners only get paid fees and nothing more).”
He framed the goal as deterring “a large batch of hashers who appear to only have profit as their motive, and are attacking Bitcoin’s decentralization in the process.” The follow-up post reads: “To be clear: both proposals are for a temporary change.”
Twenty-seven minutes later, at 09:36:23 UTC, he added a one-line clarification that both proposals are for a temporary change.
Dashjr did not name a specific pool, firmware vendor, or hashrate cohort in the post, nor did he attach a Bitcoin Improvement Proposal (BIP) number or link a Delving Bitcoin thread. He also did not specify an activation method, client, or measurement of the one-month window.
What the 100-Block Coinbase Maturity Rule Does
Bitcoin already treats coinbase outputs as immature for 100 blocks. The coinbase transaction is the first transaction in a block, and it pays the miner the block subsidy plus the fees collected in that block. Full nodes reject any spend of that output until 100 additional blocks have been built on top of it.
At the network’s 10-minute block target, that wait is about 16 hours and 40 minutes. The rule exists so a shallow chain reorganization cannot erase coins that someone has already spent.
Dashjr’s first idea would stretch that lock from 100 blocks to 4,375 blocks. At one block every 10 minutes, 4,375 blocks equals 43,750 minutes, or about 30.4 days. Miners would still receive the subsidy and fees in the coinbase output. They would simply wait roughly one month before those coins could move.
The second idea would leave the 100-block maturity rule in place and instead set the block subsidy to zero for one month. Miners would keep only transaction fees during that window. After the April 20, 2024 halving at block height 840,000, the block subsidy stands at 3.125 Bitcoin (BTC) per block.
A month of zero subsidy, applied across the whole network, would skip roughly 4,320 blocks of issuance, or about 13,500 BTC that would otherwise enter circulation in that window. That figure is an arithmetic consequence of the current schedule, not a number Dashjr published. The next scheduled halving remains at height 1,050,000, projected for early 2028, when the subsidy falls to 1.5625 BTC.
Neither idea, as described, alters the 21 million supply cap. A temporary zero subsidy would delay issuance, not cancel it, unless a later rule said otherwise. Dashjr did not describe activation mechanics in the post, and he had not answered replies asking whether the change would arrive as a soft fork. Either change would require a consensus rule update; the posts do not say how, or whether, that would be deployed.
Why He Framed It as a Decentralization Problem
Dashjr’s stated target is not miners as a group. It is what he called a “large batch of hashers” that, in his words, run only for profit and, in doing so, attack decentralization. The framing tracks an argument he has made for years, that hashpower which only submits work under Stratum v1 and never builds its own block template is not mining in the sense Bitcoin’s early design intended.
CONVOY’s product documentation puts the same claim in different words. DATUM, short for Decentralized Alternative Templates for Universal Mining, is designed so the hasher constructs the block template while the pool only reduces payout variance. The full explainer sits on CONVOY’s DATUM documentation page.
That context matters because Dashjr is no longer speaking from inside OCEAN. On August 29, 2026, Mummolin Inc. and Dashjr issued a joint statement from Cheyenne, Wyoming, announcing his resignation as chairman, Chief Technology Officer (CTO), and director. The company repurchased all of his equity. Both sides said the split reflected different visions for the future of Bitcoin mining following recent protocol developments. Dashjr said he would pursue CONVOY.
The Crypto Times covered the governance fight that preceded that exit. BIP editors removed Dashjr from the BIP repository on August 10, 2026, after Mark “Murch” Erhardt filed a motion the evening of August 9. Bryan Bishop confirmed the removal on the Bitcoin Development Mailing List at 20:52 UTC. Dashjr posted an OCEAN sabbatical note at 20:54 UTC the same day.
BIP-110, the Reduced Data Temporary Softfork tied to that fight, peaked at about 2.53% of signaling and never approached the 55% threshold it needed. A later BLAKE2b proof-of-work fork associated with Dashjr’s camp drew limited miner or exchange support after a September 1 start. Those events form the backdrop for a narrower proposal that touches miner cash flow rather than block contents or the hash algorithm.
How the Thread Answered Him
The first supportive reply came at 09:22:12 UTC from Seneca Leland, a self-described solo miner running two Goldshell HS Box units. Leland wrote that he supported delayed spending for a month, and said he was bidding to buy hashrate at power cost, wear, and a small premium.
Later replies were less aligned. Jeffrey McDonnell wrote that miners are supposed to act in their financial interest. Lallanji wrote that miners should only have profits as their motive. XBT Motorist preferred a longer maturity lock to a subsidy change, arguing that touching the issuance schedule would not work as a long-term fix.
Taimour AlNeimat drew the same distinction more sharply, calling profit-motivated miners part of the incentive model, saying extending maturity is worth discussing, and describing a zero subsidy as feeling much riskier.
Stephen P wrote that a bad actor does not care about spending the coins, and warned the change could open an attack. Scotthew82 said DATUM adoption and falling individual pool shares below 30% may already be doing the work, and that the proposal is more useful as a standby than as an immediate change. BTCLeukocyte_WR asked whether DATUM already solves template centralization and whether the mechanism would be a soft fork.
The split reads coherently. Extending coinbase maturity raises the working capital cost for anyone who needs to sell subsidy coins quickly. Zeroing the subsidy for a month is a sharper cut. It would hit publicly listed miners and highly leveraged operators harder than a hobbyist who already waits on pool payouts. It would also push the network, for 30 days, onto a fee-only security budget. Fee share of miner revenue has been thin for long stretches since the 2024 halving. Dashjr did not publish fee share figures in the post. Public block explorers on September 10, 2026, showed fees at well under 1% of typical block rewards.
What is Not Decided
Dashjr said no decision is final. He did not say who would write the code, which client would ship it, how activation would work, how a month would be measured if blocks run fast or slow, or how honest miners who already hold immature coinbase outputs would be treated at the start of a window. He also did not identify the “large batch of hashers” by pool name or hashrate percentage.
For readers following the arc from the earlier BIP editor removal through the OCEAN buyout and the launch of CONVOY, the new note is a cash flow proposal sitting on top of an unfinished decentralization fight. The 100-block rule is old, narrow, and already part of consensus. Stretching it is a change to miner liquidity. Zeroing the subsidy, even for a month, is a change to issuance timing. Readers who want the older record can start with OCEAN’s 2023 launch, funded in a $6.2 million seed round led by Jack Dorsey.
Also Read: Coinbase CEO Calls $400,000 Bitcoin Price by 2030 Reasonable
