If you are fine with waiting until BIP-110 activates for the general public to hear your rationale as to why you believe 55% is too low, then so am I. I cannot determine whether your concern is reasonable because you refuse to back up your position with evidence, so I will assume that you don't believe it is reasonable, either.

I was pointing out one reason why a well-reasoned soft fork proposal would avoid such a low activation threshold. I neither said nor implied that I’m worried about RDTS causing disruption. In fact, I explicitly stated my expectation that it will have negligible adoption. Your repeated refusal to engage with reasonable concerns is rather reassuring in that regard.

Murch

I'm not sure why you wouldn't provide this data if you are worried BIP-110 will cause disruption, when no one else has indicated that there is cause for concern. Since you don't want to provide it, and since you openly admit to being opposed, I will assume this is FUD.