Bitcoin Forum

Dana Shetterly
Collapse
Bitcoins are not commodities. They are an incorporeal hereditament. They have no corporeal existence
Like
12 hours ago 2 Likes F
 
John Edwards Cum

I made two similar replies and got my opinions delete (censored) trying to respond to above was told I had been "blocked from commenting". ie you can only comment if its not too off message- waiting for Dana to disappear or be blocked myself from this forum! reg.

edit Japan is quite close to china I think!!
(this edit is obscure even to me) it implies that the largest exchange that would be affected by a certain perception of bitcoin is MtGox -based in Japan. China has been believed to censor views not helpfull to the state (company).

Who decides who can publish on bitcoin charts? are they permitted to censor comments to their articals if so, whats the point?

I see.

goodlord666.  I did go so far as to e-mail bitcoin charts because I was unsure how these articles come into the public domain to influence opinion. Their response was they are offered articles to publish and do so on a relevance criteria but do not review or endorse any opinions expressed.  Fair enough- so site authors can and did in my case  delete and prevent me from further comments by blocking me.  I think it is important that people should be aware that is the case and that what they therefore read may be biased somewhat!.  They can not however prevent me from accessing the site and I noticed  the comment chain again altered to support the article in that under american law bitcoins are commodities. Whether the point is that data stored in digital form is capable of being owned and therefore confiscated by a lawful authority aka megaupload or it can be avoided by  moving it into a futures contract is unclear to me (as it is to others who read the article).  They "Bitcoin Titan & Trading Titan" took exception to my view which was along the lines of bitcoins are incorporeal  hereditaments kindly left in the comments. Maybe I am being unkind and they just thought my comments too longwinded or that I was a troll! however I was not notified this was the case and assume I hit a sore spot and needed to be excommunicated for heresy!. reg.

Is this some new form of trolling, too subtle for me to comprehend?

kjj. no I am not a troll (but I would say that) I want to see BTC succeed so if I see an attempt to bring BTC under control of any kind of authority I argue against that (at length) If I see censorship of free speech I argue against that (at length). I mine, I trade, I read the forum to keep up to date. Thats it.  reg.

I think goodlord's comment can be best understood when one realizes instead of meaning "I see" he meant "WTF?" 

And by "WTF?" he meant "TITS OR GTFO"

Ok, but how does that relate to the two earlier posts?

Reg, it could be that your English simply isn't up to task, but the things you're typing look like trolling.  No offense meant.

"John Edwards Cum"

What exactly does this mean?

michealmclese. Ok so I will stop now. the comment was part of the reply posted on the above site. I do not know the significance either. I wanted to support a comment that prevents BTC becoming controlled . I was censored but no one appears to care about either of those but only post short abreviations that can only have meaning within meanings - like the language drug addicts use- yes my english is not up to that. so to me its pointless. I will white list and leave you to it good luck. reg

Don't feel too bad about it.  Keep working on your English and come back when we can understand you.

I think Reg is referring to the comment thread of this blog entry:
http://blog.bitcointitan.com/post/17789738826/what-u-s-regulations-apply-to-bitcoins-as-commodities (http://blog.bitcointitan.com/post/17789738826/what-u-s-regulations-apply-to-bitcoins-as-commodities)

Gentlemen,

I dare suggest what we have come to witness here, kindly presented to us as a fine blend of Nigerian spam-speak, genuine enthusiasm and a particular je ne sais quoi as to relevance in the subject-matter (or not?), is indeed the first well documented example of a new variant in involuntary trolling (or IT...) which to the casual observer may result in mild amusement/disbelief.

(Wikipedia article pending)


On another note: I'm watching a repeat of Back to the Future III.