I can see the logic on this one. So what is behind the curtain is… As long as nodes don’t move to Bip-110, then miners won’t and Bip-110 is dead before it launches. I thought the purpose of a user activated soft fork is that the nodes upgrade to signal what they want and the miners follow what the nodes want? I wasn’t here for the UASF so I don’t know. I’m just asking.

Nobody was here for the UASF. It never activated on August 1, 2017. What's crazy to me is that BIP-110 advocates are acting like this is established game theory when it's not. They think all the success parameters are in place for a repeat of a fork that never happened, and when they are missing hash rate and nodes with economic weight.

(with, like what? 6 weeks to mount any credible threat to non-compliant miners?)