BIP-110 is a hard fork, not soft fork

I’m surprised I don’t see anyone saying this: if BIP-110 comes into effect with around 55% of the hash rate, there's a high chance it could cause a chain split.

Soft forks do not inherently carry this risk, unless there’s a bug or an unforeseen consequence.

Saying that BIP-110 is a soft fork is misleading and comes from the misconception that “soft forks restrict rules while hard forks relax them,” which is incorrect.

Take SegWit, for example: miners that have upgraded still accept non-SegWit transactions. This will not be the case with BIP-110, miners that upgrade will reject blocks containing transactions with large OP_RETURN values, risking a chain split.