Michael Saylor, a Bitcoin proponent, asserts that Bitcoin’s ecosystem should be inclusive of all custodial solutions and participants.
Community leaders within the cryptocurrency space voiced concerns over comments made by MicroStrategy executive chairman Michael Saylor, which appeared to criticize individuals who choose to self-custody their Bitcoin (BTC). Saylor expressed that those who label themselves as “crypto-anarchists” and advocate against institutional custody of digital assets are inadvertently hindering Bitcoin’s regulatory security and broader acceptance.
These remarks drew criticism from established Bitcoin advocates like ShapeShift founder Erik Voorhees and notable developers such as Ethereum’s Vitalik Buterin. Buterin particularly deemed Saylor’s stance on custody to be “absolutely outrageous.”
While Saylor has not publicly responded to any specific criticism, his October 23 post demonstrated his endorsement of the freedom to choose how assets like Bitcoin are managed. He emphasized the importance of recognizing and accepting all potential options for BTC custody based on individual choices.
The principle of self-custody has been a cornerstone of the cryptocurrency movement since the early days of blockchain technology, arising from a widespread distrust of traditional financial institutions and a desire to dissociate currency from government control.
As Bitcoin reaches its fifteenth year, innovations such as spot BTC ETFs have marked a significant evolution in Bitcoin holdings. While there is consensus that ETFs have spurred global acceptance, the call for self-custody of Bitcoin remains strong.
In fact, discussions surrounding personal custody of digital assets like BTC have intensified in 2024. Proponents, referred to as maxis, who are firm believers in a singular blockchain asset, argue passionately that decentralized crypto storage is the optimal safeguard against censorship and potential failures of centralized systems.
