But if you do run anything else (e.g. Bitcoin Core v28) and do not oppose BIP110, you may end up on a BIP110 chain anyway, if enough miners support it
With this software, you can oppose BIP110 and "e...
I understand. But that is literally what I said. You are pushing the fence sitters to either actively oppose or support the softfork.
People who don't care about spam run core and are signaling just that, they don't care.
The only use case for a URSF is to instigate a chainsplit.
Also what is the user enforcing here? That they actively want the opposite of what the SF seeks to accomplish? You can "oppose" the softfork by not using it... Just like a legacy wallet doesn't "support" segwit. But a push to break segwit because you oppose it is just asking for a chainsplit.
People who don't care about spam run core and are signaling just that, they don't care.
The only use case for a URSF is to instigate a chainsplit.
Also what is the user enforcing here? That they actively want the opposite of what the SF seeks to accomplish? You can "oppose" the softfork by not using it... Just like a legacy wallet doesn't "support" segwit. But a push to break segwit because you oppose it is just asking for a chainsplit.