Curmudgeon me, whispering in the ear of jbreher.

So far, I count two lecturing me about lecturing a newbie...

Here's what I think about the white knighting of the twos of yous.

I knew that there was some perspective shared by you and me, jojo, good ole buddy.   

You are too new to be lecturing us.

Grow up a bit first, and maybe start a bit more slowly by introducing yourself.   

Scaredy cat.   

Whatever I do (buy, sell or HODL) remains very incremental because my long term investment took place over a considerable amount of time and continued to build on the stash.

Therefore, if I shave off 5% or 10% from my BTC stash for cashflow purposes, which would be a large amount for me, that would not be any BIG deal for the whole scheme of my BTC holdings or my overall BTC investment fund.

In any event, I continue to follow the main rule, which is buy on the way down and sell on the way up strategy, and another personal rule that I cannot sell any of my BTC unless I had bought them lower... .  

By the way, as many might recall, over the years, I sometimes have helped peeps IRL get into BTC, and frequently, they will listen to me in the beginning, but also, frequently, they become smarter than me, so I have an acquaintance who largely had a $9k BTC average, and so recently, this peep kept selling decent amounts of BTC (high percentage of stash) in order to buy back lower.  I kept recommending against this strategy, unless the peep bought the BTC lower, then the peep would be authorized to sell a decent portion of the part of the stash that was bought lower.  

To some extent, the practice was showing that the peep was smarter than me because the peep's BTC stash was increased by something like 20% to 30% without injecting more cash.  I continued to assert that sooner or later, the gambling strategy of selling BTC on the way down in order to buy back lower was going to back fire and cause the loss of most if not all profits, possibly including principle, which seems to have happened around $3,300.  Peep is not saying too much, at this time, but I think that peep sold more than 70% of stash in the $3,300 to $3,400 arena.  Not a place that I would want to be, currently.

Wow.  Looks heavy as fuck.

Gosh, if we look at yearly averages, or price low points over the years, we are doing really well.

Of course, if we look at yearly high points, then currently we could become depressed when we consider last year, but looking at last year's price high point in order to measure current feelings seems to be merely causing our own self-inflicted internal misery.   

Sure, guys and gal can post whatever they like here. There are quite a few active participants in this thread, who will repeatedly call bullshit with regard to patterns of behavior, and certain dinsingenuine posters do seem to go away or modify their tune a bit, which leaves only the extreme cases for infofront to deal with or the banning/suspending of the administrators.

I do agree with you that the quality of this thread does come off as relatively decent on a substantive level (maybe our own little secret?  Don't tell anyone!!!!) because there is a lot of good content... even if having to sort through nearly 10 pages per day, and sometimes more than 40 pages per day during busy periods...  maybe even 1 out of 6 posts or so are decent, depending on perspective?   

In other words, I believe that the ratio of quasi-genuine posts to troll/shill posts in this thread tends a bit higher now than it was a couple of years ago.

O.k.... 

Eggnog, perhaps?

 

I don't understand how your point is a "fuck you" to me.

First: I largely don't make BTC price predictions beyond proclaiming that the odds are 50% (or plus or minus 1% to 10% of such 50%), and mostly my activism in this thread amounts to just criticizing the BTC price predictions of others, especially when those others are coming off as more certain about BTC price than me.

B:  I need moar splainin regarding the basis of your criticism of me because I not as witty as u.

Not easy to say.

I would suggest that currently, BTC is floating within a battle range of about $3,700 to $4,200, and likely there is no reason  to get excited about price movements within that range, except that currently there seems to be a bit of a mini-battle about whether the price should be over $4k or under.

On a personal level, I would not mind seeing BTC prices go above $4k and never to see below $4k again.. but surely that is wishful thinking, and at this point, it is quite difficult to determine which way is going to prevail in our current price battle.  We know that if BTC is really in a bear market (like it seems to be) than the odds for down are greater than the odds for up, even though prices might break up before down and even save some of the downward breakage for over this holiday weekend into next week. 

Probably only the whales have a decent thumb about how much coin (or dollar) that they are willing to spend on this battle and at this hill - and surely I would NOT be surprised if many of them are puzzled too, regarding how much coin or dollar that they will be willing to spend to push their side of the narrative.

Like you, initially, I was disinclined to participate in this particular event because I already have various systems in place that I have honed over the years, including buy/sell orders that are already established under my system.

Nonetheless, I have decided that I am going to participate too, but surely 100% will not be good for me.

I am going to engage in some incremental participation that causes me to move some funds off of each of the exchanges in which I hold bitcoin, but also contributes to the cause in other ways from my own perspective.   I am not sure about which date I will move my coins, but I am not averse to moving some of them on January 3rd because that is supposed to be the "stress test" date, but it might also be good to move some coins ahead of time, like you suggest, bitserve.

That is a weird rather than a fun fact because it seems that the analysis of what is a "correction" is going from the top to the bottom.

So far, the bottom of this particular price correction is $3,122.30, which is on December 15 (a mere week ago), we are far from out of the woods in this particular price correction. 

Currently, BTC prices (in the range of about $$3,700 to $4,000 are floating within about 20% to 25% of the most recent local bottom.   

"Conflating" is a logical flaw, and I doubt that I have made any logical flaws in my attempt to suggest that many of us are attempting to speculate here about bitcoin using a variety of factors that each of us concludes to be material and relevant, and some of those factors and speculations will be moar correct than others, and it is far from futile for folks to make such attempts even when probability speaking many folks will end up getting a variety of facts and even assessments of "fundamentals" wrong.


To the extent that it may or may not matter, I read some of your assertions that way.


You concluded that the phraseology "completely impossible" does not rise to the level of "never"?  O.k.  I see language and nuance differently from you.



I doubt that we disagree about the fact that bitcoin price movements is not merely pushed by fundamentals, and that is part of the reason that peeps engage in technical analysis to attempt to measure price movement momentum.  Of course, there are attempts to measure both fundamentals and TA, so concededly, many folks will attempt to engage in multi-variate analysis to the best of their abilities, even if they proclaim to lean more heavily in one camp than another (in terms of what they believe drives price).


I am just providing my opinions and feed back, which is one of my purposes involving myself in this thread.


I don't have any problem with that, and maybe there could have been some more clear way of making your points.  i don't know.  If you want to talk only about one aspect, and you believe that serves some kind of purpose for you (or anyone who you believe might be reading your points), then that is up to you.


O.k... It get's at momentum, too, and surely I am no expert (nor do I strive to be) in parsing out how each of these practices are different and can be (or should be) separated out for greater attempts at clarity.   


Sounds like more absolutism attempts to me, here, but sure, go ahead and attempt to define where bitcoin is at this particular moment as compared to where it will go (or should go).


Fair point that sometimes momentum will drive price more greatly than fundamentals, but even you likely acknowledge that each of the concepts TA driven and fundamentals driven is on a spectrum, and likely even a combination of both, while we are likely never (look I used the word never) witness purism in terms of what is driving price, whether short term or longer term.


You are talking pie in the sky about something that is not going to happen.  Cannot just assign a value and get peeps to agree upon it, because BTC prices are driven by differences of opinion regarding what it should be.


I doubt that BTC's fundamental value is as objectively identifiable as you seem to be making it out to be, because it is a product of time, and also a product of battling over what it should be.  If the BIG bad bears get their way, "fundamental" value from their point of view will be around $1,500 in the near future, and they will keep it there as long as they can... but that is not going to happen because there is disagreement, and they are not able to keep it in the same place for very long periods at a time (does not stop them from trying).


Again, I think that you are misusing this term.. fundamental value to attempt to assign an objective value, and I know people do that in order to engage in price finding and to also either push the price in that direction or to attempt to predict the price movement.

Don't get me wrong from my response, here.  I understand the concepts of fundamental value and technical analysis and how the concepts are attempted to be used and described, and merely because some folks use the terms in one way or another does not mean that any of us should just lie down and accept such gravitations towards concreteness that might be misleading regarding the combination of factors that affect both BTC price movement and perceptions of BTC value.


Seems to me that you are attempting to lock yourself to much into "pure" thoughts.


Of course, maturity matters in terms of where BTC is at on the s-curve, which means exponential growth that should be factored into probable futures that may or may not happen.


That is not going to happen, but won't stop people from trying to get agreement and identification, which to me, seems to be a bit too much of an attempt at constructing concreteness that does not exist.


Of course, one of the most certain things about bitcoin is that it is likely to continue to be extremely volatile until more and more market cap flows into it, and it becomes harder to manipulate.


You seem to recognize that BTC price is pushed by a variety of factors including but not limited to TA, fundamentals, news (combined with FUD and FOMO), adoption and networking effects.

Why don't you take your random "other coins" stream of "meaning" consciousness to some other thread(s)?

From you, I will take that as a compliment, goofball.  

Does that absence from the Bitstamp numbers mean that we should take the volume data with a grain of salt?  Are we being duped by some folks wanting to suggest a bitcoin trade volume level that does not exist (or an exaggerated set of data)?  Many of us likely realize that sometimes there can be misinformation that tries to manipulate us into doing something that we would not otherwise do... for example, FOMO buying.

I am surely not a shorting expert, and generally, I agree with your premise that shorting options are greater now than they were in 2015.   

I am pretty sure that Bitfinex offered shorting options during the whole of 2015, and several BIG chinese exchanges (to the extent that their trade was not fake) offered bitcoin shorting in 2015.

I am not sure about any other avenues of shorting BTC that would have then been available because of course, overall, there are way more exchanges and financialization tools available now, yet I am have my doubts about folks who want to argue that bitcoin is going to zero, now, because there are way more shorting opportunities currntly available in the BTC space. 

Anyone else have more accurately and question responsive memory (and/or experiences) than me?

Huh?  Why does it matter?  I recall taking courses in economics, and I would frequently criticize some of the theories for attempting to place too much quantification on various aspects of human behaviors, but it does not hurt to make attempts and in the end, some people are going to be better (and more accurate) at such quantifications than others, even while there are going to be areas of uncertainties and even, perhaps, misplaced concreteness.



Of course, the longer the history and the more mature (and even comparable) the asset class is going to cause predictive models to be more accurate.



Never say never.

You seems to be creating more futility than is warranted with your statement of absolutisms, here.



Huh?  You are losing me.

From my understanding, our current BTC price dynamics is experiencing a considerable amount of price battle, which is demonstrated by recent increases in trade volume (measured in dollars), so there is a price battle going on and we will find out which way the price goes from such battle.  Does not seem to be different from the usual bitcoin situation, and many folks who watch the bitcoin space are going to understand that it becomes much more difficult for any small group to manipulate BTC prices when trade volumes are high.  In other words, it is going to cost a lot of fucking money (or value) to manipulate BTC prices during times like these (high trade volume) times, yet such high costs of manipulation and push also can have some potential for considerable profits for one side or the other to experience considerable gains if such side can get the BTC price to break into their preferred direction.

So there is frequently uncertainty regarding which way such price battle is going to play out including the current price battle, but that does not mean that there are not tools that peeps have in order to attempt to predict both the direction outcome and the degree in which it will break, assuming that it breaks (which is also not certain, because it could just end up going sideways and the battle reaches a truce, which seems like the lesser of the likely outcomes during periods in which the trade volume picks up like it currently has picked up).