I think the "temporary" nature of #BIP110 is actually it's what leads to the reasoning of nostr:nprofile1qyxhwumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmvqyv8wumn8ghj7urjv4kkjatd9ec8y6tdv9kzumn9wsqzqpxfzhdwlm3cx9l6wdzyft8w8y9gy607tqgtyfq7tekaxs7lhmxf5dcd8v that it has potential for being used to "threaten a reorg" later.  

The rejoining of the chains later does actually just seems like more risk than reward and threatens history of the main chain in the case of the BIP failing.

I'm running #BIP110 right now because it's directionally correct and majority support of the BIP would be better than it failing completely. But if someone makes a BIP-110 version that is not "temporary" I will run this, as I view it much safer for bitcoin, because it can either succeed or fail gracefully.