Of course, it would be short-term scary, but o.k.  that's fine.  Make it so!!!!

I have noticed in the past week or so, that on BPIP my merit rank has been around 34 and currently shows that I have received 471 merits; however, in reality, currently, I have received only 454 merits, which puts my current actual placement at a rank of 40.

Accordingly, it seems that my recognition score has gotten skewed upwards too, seemingly based on the mistaken merit rank.  
A few weeks ago, my recognition score used to be around 97 or 98 (fluctuating a bit, of course), but currently is at 94, which seems to be partially higher based on the mistaken merit rank...  My activity rank went up a bit, too, so sometimes it can be difficult to know exactly the reasons for the recognition score changing (upwards in this example).

probably neither of them are dying any time soon... even several years of not dying.  I would think that SV would die first, if it does, but who knows?

Yes...there is a reason NOT to bet it "all". 

Aggressive investments would be in the 15% to 50% of investment capital arena (usually thinking about liquidity too), and I would be quite hesitant to invest more than 30%.  Conservative investors would be in the less than 5% arena, and there are a lot of folks who are quite afraid to even invest 1%, which seems quite short-sighted.

I suspected that the bottom was looking ugly.  

Let us pray for a BOTTOM, and hopefully something better than what we currently got.

Seems that you overinvested.

Maybe you should sell some before they all go to zero?


Why you need ALL CAPS to make your supposedly emotional points?

Don't get short term incentives mixed up with long term incentives. 

In other words, bitcoin has so much hashing power thrown at it, that it takes way more money to attack it than to play fairly.

Surely, there could be another test of bitcoin in terms of billions of dollars thrown at a hashing war, but let us see how long such a war would be sustained, if it were to occur, when the users are not going to accept or recognize such.

Similar threats were made in 2017 regarding assertions that mining power rules the bitcoin world, and it seems those assertions were shown to be untrue in actual practice... even if you believe miners are going to gang up or get sufficient mining power to sustain a 51% attack, even for several months, and they threaten to do it, we have to see whether the rubber will actually hit the road and they will do it, and we will have to see if bitcoin users go over to that take over chain.

I agree with everything that you said, except for the bitcoin dethroning part.  Get fucking real.  First of all, a few retard, nutjob conmen, such as Craig and Calvin, and whatever team they have and even throw in roger's team and jihan's team, that is not enough to dethrone, even though their behaviors can disrupt and exacerbate and just assist in shaking out froth and weak hands.

In other words, there is nothing even close to bitcoin currently in terms of network effects, so yeah, just because the price is falling, bitcoin fundaments seem quite strong, and BTC developers and the more true BTC believers (some call them maximalists) are not giving up on their investment(s) of time and money into bitcoin, merely because the price is crashing, again.

retardation in cryptolandia (which includes bitcoin in this case) seems to NOT have limits.

Personally, in the facts scenario that you present, there seem to be a few more fundamental important questions beyond whether Craig and Calvin would ultimately be "successful" because that would be a real long game answer - and likely too difficult to answer without knowing interim developments which would seem to be the more important questions at the moment, such as:

1) is what they are saying really true... Do they actually have such patent (and financial backing) ammunition in place?

2)  assuming that 1) above is true, then are they ready, willing and able to play those cards (or just threatening to play them without any ability to follow through, which seems to be a kind of modus operandi of craig),

3) assuming they follow through with 2) above, would their efforts be effective (does bitcoin give a shit).  Maybe some aspects of dumb money cares (and perhaps temporarily) but when it comes down to actual bitcoin dynamics would bitcoin continue to grow in spite of whatever efforts that they attempt to make through various traditional legal institutions, and perhaps their efforts would even have the opposite effect to show that bitcoin does not give a shit

TLDR:  I would have to see some of this play out for a while, before I would take those loonies at their word... and not just short term downward BTC price manipulation that might not last much longer - but might not really be connected in any meaningful way to them, just that BTC price is correcting based on a variety of needs to purge a lot of the dumber money.. which could take a while with so many various shit coins and ICOs still holding some value and still pumping with every little sign of a possible BTC recovery.

In internetlandia, including bitcoinlandia, including this thread, it seems to be a fairly common place practice to assume nearly every participant is a guy (even if such presumption is not true)...   

Frequently, girls avoid such self-reference and don't tend to talk about it too much (which could be a good opsec, too)... so in that regard, the one girl can be a quasi-mythical "every girl" character. 

All of those ones gonzo.. for a few years...

Each of thems are Old news... an era that has passed..

Boys and girl.

Fair enough.

Seems to have resolved decently well, even though we went through a a few weeks of transition turmoil ... .. and these kinds of set backs seem to be just a part of living and even perhaps a sign of the dangers of taking anything for granted.. such as the continued existence of this thread... whether its current culture or its various evolutionary stages.

Your clarification doesn't seem to clarify, and I already provided decent explanation regarding you not being what you purport to be - don't get caught up in "not being one person" technicalities because that misses the point.  Also, don't get caught up in some assertions that I am making anything up, because I have merely been stating what my current tentative conclusion are.. which is merely seeming to become repetitive for whatever weight my tentative conclusions have, they have already been made a sufficient number of times... it seems.  In other words, old news.

I will bite.  And?

Pretty much Yefi confirmed that he did not have any information to really substantiate what he was suggesting.

I think that the official story is quite plausible in this situation, which was that Adam left and Admin was having some difficulties managing the thread and complaints and reports.  Initially, theymos took an easy route of closing the thread, but thereafter reconsidered his decision after there were reasonable proposals including the election of a new thread owner (which ended up becoming Infofront - through popular demand).

Personally, the way that it worked out, I think that it was overkill to remove signatures from this thread, and I doubt that the dynamic of the thread would be changed too much by allowing signatures, here.  Also, infofront's relative hands off (but a bit of hands on from time to time) does seem to have caused the thread to continue, even better than when Adam was here.. because sometimes Adam became part of the problem - especially once he became more jaded by some of the BIG blocker nonsense and seemingly largely made up conspiracies about this forum embarking in too much supposed "censorship."

As far as I can tell, what micpeep(bot) says seems accurate that he was NOT involved in the forum on or before the reopening of the WO thread and the then discussions around transition of the thread ownership to infofront.

Chartbuddy went before adam, and chartbuddy was an account that was owned and managed by Richy_T.

Both Adam and Richy_T were similarly disgruntled and seemingly deluded by their BIG blocker conspiracy theories, even though Richy_T did take his marbles (referring to chartbuddy) first.

Adam actually made a mistake and got his account hacked, and seemed to NOT recognize the value of getting access to the account back.. I don't think that he tried too hard, but his burning bridges with forum administration probably did not help him to make his account access request (seemingly devolving into his seeming increasing ego problems, too.. that kind of were connected to BIG blockr and purported censorship drama).

I see that jbreher beat me to it and addressed most of what I said above.

Common knowledge about decent odds that walls are a reverse indicator. 

"They" would like you to believe that the price is going down.