I am proposing an alternative way to activate soft forks. Please let me know if you see any issues with this method.

BIP: XXX
Layer: Consensus (soft fork)
Title: nLockTime signaling and flag day activation
Author: /dev/fd0 <alicexbt@protonmail.com>
Status: Draft
Type: Standards Track
Created: 2024-08-19
License: Public Domain

## Abstract

This document describes a process to activate soft forks using flag day after `nLockTime` signaling and discussion.

## Motivation

BIP 8 and BIP 9 are controversial. This BIP is an alternative which addresses the problems with other activation methods.

## Specification

- Assign numbers to different soft fork proposals or use their BIP numbers
- Users can broadcast their transactions with one of these numbers used as `nLockTime` to show support
- Miners inlcuding a transaction in block would signal readiness for a soft fork
- Community can analyze these transactions after 3 months and prepare for a flag day activation of soft fork

Example:
Use 119 to signal support for OP_CHECKTEMPLATEVERIFY in `nLockTime`

## Reference implementation

Activation: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/ab91bf39b7c11e9c86bb2043c24f0f377f1cf514.diff

Exclusion in relay or mining: https://github.com/bitcoinknots/bitcoin/commit/18cd7b0ef6eaeacd06678c6d192b6cacc9d7eee5.diff

---

If a transaction does not get included in block for a long time, users can replace it with another transaction spending same inputs and use a different `nLockTime`.

/dev/fd0
floppy disk guy