Casey defends the validity of ordinals, countering Luke's assertions that they are nonsensical or damaging to Bitcoin. They argue that opinions on ordinals can vary among reasonable individuals, highlighting the importance of neutrality, especially for a BIP (Bitcoin Improvement Proposal) editor who should remain impartial.

Furthermore, Casey points out that the application of certain clauses from BIP 2—specifically those stipulating adherence to the philosophy of Bitcoin and requiring proposals to represent a net improvement—may be inconsistently enforced compared to past BIPs. They suggest that previous proposals have been considered despite containing elements widely regarded as harmful if implemented. By emphasizing this, Casey suggests a potential bias in how new proposals, like those involving ordinals, are being evaluated.