The merit system is aimed to improve posts quality and this is a positive trend. However, walking around the forum I see that many high-rank members haven’t yet achieved any merit. Thinking about this situation I have some ideas to share:
1) It seems like many forum members do not correspond to their ranks. If Hero member can’t produce any valuable post (e.g. posts that do not receive merit) what can this situation mean?
2) Is it true that Full Member achieved according to new rules will be much more helpful for community than vast majority of old Heroes? I believe yes!
3) It is interesting why is there such a big gap between Member and Full Member (you need 10 times more merit)? Recently it was needed only to double activity score…
4) It is interesting if somebody tried to estimate the average forum correlation between posts made and merits received? Is it 1 to 1000? More? And what if we take into consideration that many merits are granted within topics discussing them? (let alone “internal” or “friends” transfer).
5) Is it only my impression that this system (in the introduced form) is aimed not only to fight for posts quality?
Even though this post is good, it looks like you have a lot of one liner posts, so it may be difficult to earn merit in certain sections and when there is not very much substance to your posts. I gave one merit for this post, and since your writing is decent, you may be able to find ways to get 9 more merits based on your post quality. |
|
|
|
Any implications that this clearing of the back up is due to organic reasons (rather than spam attacks) is likely unwarranted. In the past weeks, I have done several BTC transactions using fees of less than $.20, more specifically $.09 and $.12 - and all of my transactions were confirmed in less than 30 minutes and they were done from blockchain.info.. that is still using legacy addresses... I am thinking that free transactions would also go through in a fairly timely manner, but probably running a bit more of a gambling risk if there are some desires to NOT process spam (as zero fees might be considered as spam by some of the miners). Anyhow, I am thinking about transferring some funds from legacy BTC addresses to seg wit addresses, just to have more of my BTC in the newer designed segwit addresses. Seems to me that transferring to segwit addresses could be a bit of insurance for future situations and might pay for itself in terms of future savings on fees and transaction times in the event of future spam attacks or other reasons in which on-chain fees might go up. |
|
|
|
Seems to be a kind of wishful thinking that comes from corporate shill bear trolls... They imagine an endless supply of coins that banks might be able to dump, and sure good luck with that.
Let's take the hypothetical that bearwhales might have 30k BTC that they could dump. Somehow the bearwhales would have to be able to acquire those 30k coins without significantly moving the price upwards. I have long had a theory that bearwhales engage in a circular kind of rotation of coins. They purchase coins off exchanges and then they dump them on exchanges and that way they are continuing to put downwards pressures on the price; however, they can only acquire so many coins over the counter even if they want to continue to operate at a loss in order to attempt to push BTC prices down.
But they do not need 30,000 coins in order to dump 30000 coins. They can have only a fraction of that amount of coin or just a whole lot of fiat, and use margin trading. If their big dump causes a downward reaction, they can make a huge profit if they close their position at the right time. Then they have even more assets to pull off an even bigger short, next time around. I agree, and I don't consider my theory regarding what they are doing to be comprehensive because I am sure that they have a lot of tools in their quiver (mixed metaphores), and some times they may NOT be strictly motivated by profits in bitcoin, if they perceive that downwardly manipulating bitcoin can profit them in other ways (or other assets). Furthermore, even though we might ascribe a lot of resources being available to bearwhales, I discount claims that their power is unlimited because there is ONLY so much that they can do when the trend is against them, so yeah, the trend is your friend to attempt to exacerbate conditions while you can, but once the trend changes, sometimes they will lose control of such trend.. and I think that this happened a few times in recent bitcoin history including the early 2016 break above $500 and likely the August 2017 break out above $3k... Certainly the bearwhale fucks did not want BTC prices to break above $500 in early 2016 or the price to break above $3k in August 2017.. but they lost control and/or ability to keep BTC prices down in those lower price ranges. |
|
|
|
If you are a BTC GOD then why are you asking for donation?
All gods ask for money. Look at the collection plate in church. You know what the cost is to run fiber for heaven for internet access?  Did you ever seen God? Collection plate was for the priest and workers in the church, but not for the God. Can you show me proof of your God asking money in church? I have nothing to do with the cost, internet or servers. I used to own a server in the past, but not now. This thread became offtopic in a akward way For some reason I found this thread, and it was not like the initial topic was very great in the first place.... so yeah, awkward meets awkward.  |
|
|
|
Seems to be a kind of wishful thinking that comes from corporate shill bear trolls... They imagine an endless supply of coins that banks might be able to dump, and sure good luck with that. Let's take the hypothetical that bearwhales might have 30k BTC that they could dump. Somehow the bearwhales would have to be able to acquire those 30k coins without significantly moving the price upwards. I have long had a theory that bearwhales engage in a circular kind of rotation of coins. They purchase coins off exchanges and then they dump them on exchanges and that way they are continuing to put downwards pressures on the price; however, they can only acquire so many coins over the counter even if they want to continue to operate at a loss in order to attempt to push BTC prices down. |
|
|
|
Doesn't matter what I think, and as you said "people who understand the value of bitcoin". Newbies don't understand shit, but, they do understand metrics like market cap, so it will hurt bitcoin. If bitcoin is not number one on the shitty marketcap metric that will hurt bitcoin adoption plain and simple.
What do the advertisers say? "you don't need a good product, just good marketing"
In that case, bitcoin was fucked from day one. 21 million coins for the entire world economy was never going to work. Most world citizens (>99%) have never had $8750 at one time in their lives. They will never buy bitcoin at that price. They will buy Ripple for $1 instead. EDIT: Yes, I know they are divisible but the average idiot can't comprehend that. The real problem though is that the idiots don't understand the importance or decentralization, lack of a central authority, deflationary monetary system, developer talent, trustless, and so on. Bitcoin is the best coin without a doubt in my opinion. But, how in the fuck can we get mass adoption, when most people still think the media, and governments are the good guys. Crypto will get mass adoption, but, I fear that it will be a bullshit coin supported by the banks, media, and governments. I agree, I think the coins that will do the best with the coming mass adoption will be the ones who have the largest number of coins in circulation so they seem cheap to the idiots. Why buy a bitcoin when you can buy 10 ETH or 8000 XRP for the same price? Luckily, big institutional money will still flow into bitcoin. Are you guys telling me that if we properly advertise Dogecoin (yes, DOGE, much wow) that is going to be a valuable coin for the masses? I mean infinite supply, so cheap, much fun. Insane hahahahahahaha... Got a great chuckle out of that one, and I got much wow out of it, too. |
|
|
|
BTC dominance is sinking and sinking.
I don't really like this.
Altcoins are thriving just as before the crash and it gets worst.
Its likely part of a cycle - I (speculatively) can see an alt bubble followed by a BTC surge Its been a few days since I've checked all the prices and I must say I am stunned that the alts are coming back so hard. I hope you're right starmman, but, it just doesn't look like BTC will ever regain its dominance to even the 50% level. Hell, look at ripple up 50%, people were wiped out on that recently and it just doesn't seem to matter. I consider most alts to be shit, but, I guess when it's all speculating it doesn't really matter that they are shit. Market cap and bitcoin dominance can be a misleading indicator for all the reasons that you already stated... so in that regard, people who understand the value of bitcoin are going to realize that bitcoin is the one to buy rather than gambling on those many other alt coins - and useful also NOT to get distracted by coinmarket cap, at least in terms of informing you about the dominance of BTC's fundamentals in comparison to any (and all) of the other coins. Crypto War successful and ongoing (block size, transactions, hard forks, media) create less reliance on bitcoin and more on centralized tokens pump alts, sell tokens to newbs create national tokens (russia coin, Petro coin etc), pump for newbs sell into bitcoin - big pump (Huge) before next battle on bitcoin exchanges (corrupt, broke, no reserves, multiple exchanges as well as other btc scams) legislate exchange and ban btc to promote national crypto btc crash and they hope for good lets see how it all pans out (within next 10 months) It's going to take a whole hell of a lot longer than 10 months for all of these things to play out. I agree with you mymenace that a lot of these things are happening and a lot of like things are going to happen in the crypto space and maybe even attempts to target and to undermine bitcoin, but even if a lot of these things happen all over the globe, it does not result in bitcoin successfully being stagnated and repressed, even though there might be some shorter-term and localized successes that might only last a short period of time because bitcoin is all over the fucking place, and there are a lot of governmental difficulties to coordinate, even if BIG ASS financial players attempt to coordinate their attacks on bitcoin, even the BIG ASS financial players are not sufficiently unified to pull off some kind of successful unified repression of bitcoin on a world-wide basis... TLDR - bitcoin has become too BIG, too decentralized and too strong to kill... the toothpaste is out of the tube, and it's like trying to kill the internet; good luck with that.. I agree, completely just mentioning the enemies tactics, usually successful yeah bitcoin just seems too damn strong a network to change though and the attacks begin again, just reading this https://www.rt.com/business/418390-france-germany-bitcoin-clampdown/From the enemy themselves the Bank for International Settlements (BIS), direct from the IMF Don't get me wrong. I cannot see the future with any kind of meaningful precision, and I don't think that any of us needs to see the future exactly. I am NOT asserting that the various attacks on bitcoin will not have various successes along the way to stifle bitcoin and to divert to mislead people into NOT buying bitcoin; however, it is also likely that BTC is also going to adapt to these various ongoing attacks - just like there was some adapting that took place within bitcoin because of the various BIG blocker attacks and hardfork attacks - whether from propaganda or actual actions of XT, Classic, Segwit2x, Bcash.. blah blah blah... With the passage of time, even though various attacks on bitcoin and interest groups against bitcoin can attempt to consolidate and throw more resources at undermining bitcoin, there are also various ways that bitcoin has grown and has become stronger and less centralized and likely to carry on, even if some aspects of bitcoin are taken down by attacks. So, certainly, I am NOT arguing that bitcoin is some kind of monolithic existence but instead bitcoin is also like an organism, too.. that is all over the fucking place, and there is no central place to attack... When have we had this kind of new paradigm shifting phenomenon with proof of work spread over the planet and more computing power than any other system... and bitcoin can grow and evolve too.. including ongoing developments like lightning network seems to cause bitcoin to become even less centralized and more powerful as a decentralized paradigm shifting phenomenon... .. still growing.. still growing.. and maybe even there are some set backs in bitcoin from time to time, too.. but it's pending death or demise is over exaggerated. |
|
|
|
Doesn't matter what I think, and as you said "people who understand the value of bitcoin". Newbies don't understand shit, but, they do understand metrics like market cap, so it will hurt bitcoin. If bitcoin is not number one on the shitty marketcap metric that will hurt bitcoin adoption plain and simple.
What do the advertisers say? "you don't need a good product, just good marketing"
In that case, bitcoin was fucked from day one. 21 million coins for the entire world economy was never going to work. Most world citizens (>99%) have never had $8750 at one time in their lives. They will never buy bitcoin at that price. They will buy Ripple for $1 instead. EDIT: Yes, I know they are divisible but the average idiot can't comprehend that. When bitcoin is $100k or $1million per unit, they are going to be even less affordable, but so fucking what? Not everyone can own a whole bitcoin, and sooner or later that fact is going to sink in. Right now, there are quite a few peeps who can relatively easily own 1million satoshis, but later on, even that goal is going to become more difficult for peeps to achieve. So if they want to be bitcoin rich, they better get their asses onboard earlier rather than putting their money into some scam that may or may not help them in the BTC accumulation arena. |
|
|
|
BTC dominance is sinking and sinking.
I don't really like this.
Altcoins are thriving just as before the crash and it gets worst.
Its likely part of a cycle - I (speculatively) can see an alt bubble followed by a BTC surge
I hope you're right starmman, but, it just doesn't look like BTC will ever regain its dominance to even the 50% level. Hell, look at ripple up 50%, people were wiped out on that recently and it just doesn't seem to matter. I consider most alts to be shit, but, I guess when it's all speculating it doesn't really matter that they are shit. Altcoins are predominantly denominated in BTC. So when BTC goes up by X%, alts will usually go up by at least X% as well in terms of USD. This will cause people to think that alts are entering a bull run, which might trigger buy orders that will drive up their price in terms of BTC as well, which will ultimately lead to a price rise above the X% of BTC in terms of USD. Why is that happening only now and not before? Before people would only pay attention to BTC/xyzcoin trading pairs. Now we have the copycat namesake and all BCHBCCBcash that is being used to move and pump/dump between alt trading pairs. BCH and BTG are like us creating another USD and having special interest groups declare it legal tender. This "trend" needs to be addressed much like fraudulent ICO's have. This really falls on the responsibilities of the exchanges. You are describing aspects of the free market, and if exchanges can make money on it, then they will do it. Sure there could be some issues of politiking and stealing of BTC's namesake, and perhaps much of this will get sorted over time with whatever coin(s) have the best fundamentals... It could take several years for folks to realize some of the differences.... and in the meantime, there is a large bit of wild, wild west out there, including exchanges that also want to convolute and get into the misleading game. |
|
|
|
[...] even if you are still spending a considerable amount of time trying to figure out what it is that you invested into, exactly. hahahahahaha [...]
Working on that on almost a daily basis since Q3 2013. And admittedly still barely have a clue. But since it glows in the dark I can't stop looking at it and investigate why. There are so many levels of bitcoin including but not limited to technicals, socio-economics, political, financials - including market performance, relations to other projects other assets and other crypto projects, and even when you believe that you might begin to grasp some aspects of bitcoin specifically, there evolve more aspects to learn whether those are changes or just changes in the relationships. Even history changes depending on who is telling the story, so we are battling actual facts and made up shit... such as the BCH story that they are the real bitcoin. OG = original gangster I think that the label is relative because in part it can signify how long you have been around the space and it can signify how much you know or how involved you have been. So, maybe you and I have been around the space for a similar time, but then newer comers might consider us to be OG, but we might not consider ourselves to be OG relative to folks who got in earlier or relative to folks who may have been more involved in the space. I have heard some folks claiming to be a kind of OG because they got involved in 2016, and since things move so fast, that could be considered OG to someone who just got involved in late 2017 or early 2018. |
|
|
|
BTC dominance is sinking and sinking.
I don't really like this.
Altcoins are thriving just as before the crash and it gets worst.
Its likely part of a cycle - I (speculatively) can see an alt bubble followed by a BTC surge Its been a few days since I've checked all the prices and I must say I am stunned that the alts are coming back so hard. I hope you're right starmman, but, it just doesn't look like BTC will ever regain its dominance to even the 50% level. Hell, look at ripple up 50%, people were wiped out on that recently and it just doesn't seem to matter. I consider most alts to be shit, but, I guess when it's all speculating it doesn't really matter that they are shit. Market cap and bitcoin dominance can be a misleading indicator for all the reasons that you already stated... so in that regard, people who understand the value of bitcoin are going to realize that bitcoin is the one to buy rather than gambling on those many other alt coins - and useful also NOT to get distracted by coinmarket cap, at least in terms of informing you about the dominance of BTC's fundamentals in comparison to any (and all) of the other coins. Crypto War successful and ongoing (block size, transactions, hard forks, media) create less reliance on bitcoin and more on centralized tokens pump alts, sell tokens to newbs create national tokens (russia coin, Petro coin etc), pump for newbs sell into bitcoin - big pump (Huge) before next battle on bitcoin exchanges (corrupt, broke, no reserves, multiple exchanges as well as other btc scams) legislate exchange and ban btc to promote national crypto btc crash and they hope for good lets see how it all pans out (within next 10 months) It's going to take a whole hell of a lot longer than 10 months for all of these things to play out. I agree with you mymenace that a lot of these things are happening and a lot of like things are going to happen in the crypto space and maybe even attempts to target and to undermine bitcoin, but even if a lot of these things happen all over the globe, it does not result in bitcoin successfully being stagnated and repressed, even though there might be some shorter-term and localized successes that might only last a short period of time because bitcoin is all over the fucking place, and there are a lot of governmental difficulties to coordinate, even if BIG ASS financial players attempt to coordinate their attacks on bitcoin, even the BIG ASS financial players are not sufficiently unified to pull off some kind of successful unified repression of bitcoin on a world-wide basis... TLDR - bitcoin has become too BIG, too decentralized and too strong to kill... the toothpaste is out of the tube, and it's like trying to kill the internet; good luck with that.. |
|
|
|
I think alts are a disease and we won't have another 10x or 100x increase until the alts largely die off. Every time bitcoin pumps and the alts pump even harder, it is like cancer overtaking the body every time it starts getting healthy. This sickness will have to run it's course and when the disease has been cured/eradicated, bitcoin can finally grow to it's true potential. This will probably take a few more years.
I largely agree with you, but I really don't think that alts are as negative as you are making them out to be because they both cause a stagnation of bitcoin's growth but they cause fuel for bitcoin's growth too... both of these dynamics are happening at the same time... and the honey badger does not give a shit. |
|
|
|
BTC dominance is sinking and sinking.
I don't really like this.
Altcoins are thriving just as before the crash and it gets worst.
That's to be expected considering that there is only one Bitcoin and over a thousand altcoins. I don't really see an issue with that though, especially when considering that most altcoins are bound to eventually evaporate like dot com companies and the likes. With the number of coins slowly losing dominance over time is expected, but, this loss has been quick. What's more, we are likely close to another coin becoming the market leader. Can you imagine that, A banker coin like ripple, and a broken dictator coin like ethereum becoming the peoples choice. I should never of expected different I guess, most people in this world are dumb arse sheep only care about profits rather than making the financial system better. This effect is bound to accelerate with the growth of the overall crypto market. The more people buy into Bitcoin, the more people will find interest in altcoins and the larger the potential volume that can trigger growth in altcoins will become. It's a snowball effect. A question that I find interesting is whether or not Bitcoin will regain dominance massively once the "big crash" comes and useless shitcoins as well as all the ponzis and scams get obliterated. Yes. I think that the snowball effect analogy is a good one, yet I don't think that it matters that much whether bitcoin gains or regains dominance because in the end bitcoin is going to remain king because it's fundamentals are the strongest.... I think that one decent side effect of the alt coin craze involves the kind of diversion effect that it has in terms of being able to bring a lot of capital into the crypto space that ultimately is going to allow bitcoin to grow and grow and grow without bitcoin having to serve as the main focus, whether it is regulations, innovations or even investment, and a lot of that money is going to flow back into bitcoin in one way or another and support the bitcoin ecosystem, one way or another even while many of those other coins are simultaneously leeching off of bitcoin's security and strength of its infrastructure. I may be contradicting myself because in the short run, I am suggesting that we should not give too many ratts' asses about bitcoin's dominance or whether there are various flippenings, ripplings, cashenings, dashenings, etc... so in the short run confusion and even diversion of funds into a variety of other crypto projects, but in the longer run... maybe 30 years.. good money is going to flow into the good asset, which is going to likely remain bitcoin based on bitcoin's security and longer term strong foundations... there may be one or two others, such as Monero that also can keep a decent foundation... but coins like ETH might have some difficulties keeping up because of their being so spread out and likely going to lose money through their many security lackings... and I am surprised that they already have not been brought down a few times by some of the bugs and the fact that so many scam coins have been using them. Coins like ETH are also going to have centralization like difficulties that may cause regulatory issues, unless they can increase their decentralization of their quasi-centralized aspects.. but they don't seem to be heading that way.. especially talking proof of stake mumbo jumbo baloney, which does not seem to help with centralization aspects of those projects/coins. |
|
|
|
BTC dominance is sinking and sinking.
I don't really like this.
Altcoins are thriving just as before the crash and it gets worst.
Its likely part of a cycle - I (speculatively) can see an alt bubble followed by a BTC surge Its been a few days since I've checked all the prices and I must say I am stunned that the alts are coming back so hard. I hope you're right starmman, but, it just doesn't look like BTC will ever regain its dominance to even the 50% level. Hell, look at ripple up 50%, people were wiped out on that recently and it just doesn't seem to matter. I consider most alts to be shit, but, I guess when it's all speculating it doesn't really matter that they are shit. Market cap and bitcoin dominance can be a misleading indicator for all the reasons that you already stated... so in that regard, people who understand the value of bitcoin are going to realize that bitcoin is the one to buy rather than gambling on those many other alt coins - and useful also NOT to get distracted by coinmarket cap, at least in terms of informing you about the dominance of BTC's fundamentals in comparison to any (and all) of the other coins. |
|
|
|
I am not assuming anything. I merely said that they (Wall street types) are looking into Bitcoin, and they did not even know about it before $10k. So how is my statement assuming in regards to their actual investment or their actual pushing this particular price rise - all by themselves? I suppose I am assuming that the more that Wall street types know about bitcoin, the more that their knowing about it could contribute to some kind of bullish impact on bitcoin.. and I am NOT even saying that buying pressure is coming from ONLY one aspect of the market. Even you should realize that Bitcoin is much more than some simple kind of appeal to only one sector.. financialization is ONLY one of the several bitcoin networking effects that may well be in its early infancy stages. You are familiar with the seven network effects that are outlined by Trace Mayer? You need a link? Do you think that those other six network (besides financialization) effects are not important in the overall consideration regarding where bitcoin is at and where it might be going? Do you think that those other six network effects have already sufficiently matured in bitcoin? or do you think that those other six network effects are still too early to potentially influence bitcoin into an early 2013 type scenario. By the way, I like the way you even doubled down (NOT) on your bearishness by suggesting a 2011 scenario (which I think that you are implying that this particular BTC downtrend could be even longer than the one in 2014/2015, which I think is what you mean by your 2011 reference). It is like ongoing that you, Terabeara, take these outrageous positions (like a troll) to spread FUD, and then later, when some semblance of the direction of your prediction moves in a direction of coming true, then you don't hesitate to take full credit for something that you did not even call - because like I mentioned earlier, you had been whining about BTC bubble ever since $5k, and I recall that you were even whining about BTC bubble when you first came back into the thread in 2015 as BTC prices were coming out of the long flat period, it did not take you too long to get back to your bearish talking points (here's your return to the WO post for reference)... Even when you try to act like you have reasonable discussion points, you are flooded with persistent bearish BTC FUD spreading party pooping negativisms.  TLDR: TeraBera needs to attend some kind of BTC enlightenment camp that is NOT in the woods, so she can break her ties from bears, but more importantly break her ties from government/corporate shills. INTENSE reform is what seems to be needed for your lost cause status (if there is any possible hope?). We'veYou've been making the same arguments about how everyone in the world must want a bitcoin ever since the beginning but that doesn't stop bitcoin from following its chart patterns and crashing spectacularly before the next rise. I think that you would have been better with your "we" formulation, rather than proclaiming my particular argument. You have not been very good at characterizing the various arguments of others whether that is me or generalizing about what all bulls want, supposedly. Get the fuck out of here with your characterizing what everyone wants (including me). We have ourselves something like .5% world adoption of bitcoin with areas of the world and some populations having greater bitcoin penetration than others. How are we going to characterize what this is exactly, when it remains small as fuck? There is a certain level of anticipated continue growth merely based on the current low level of penetration. Whether greater growth happens or not is not an inevitable proposition, it is merely a tendency that I describe and other bitcoin bulls describe, and sure some of us might be suggesting that there is a kind of inevitability to this network growth phenomenon, especially when we are seeing a large number of network growth signs on an ongoing basis. So yeah, we can have ongoing growth and adoption in a variety of ways and also have ongoing downward manipulation of prices, that may or may not succeed in keeping the price down. Wall street isn't going to buy into a downtrend. They will wait until every drop of blood is in the street.
If they don't buy, then they might have to chase the train... Who the fuck knows what wall street is going to do? Wall street is not a monolithic entity and some of those folks are already getting into it, and others of those folks are taking longer before they get in... Again, I don't understand why you continue to attempt to focus on one factor and then attribute contrary claims to other people.. while also ignoring various networking effect points of my previous posts while continuing to harp on simplified financialization only? You probably don't really want to attempt any kind of meaningful discussion, but instead want to propagate partial stories and your ongoing FUD spreading.. while attempting to appear as if you are "getting real" when you are surely lacking in "real" on an ongoing basis...and seemingly on purpose. |
|
|
|
Sitarow's post opened the flood gates and now I am cruising the way back machine trying to remember exactly when I first heard of bitcoin. I want to say that it was right around Christmas of 2011..the price had just spiked to $15 and then dropped...everyone was in a panic. Quite the series of unfortunate events drew me towards bitcoin..mostly due to the closing of Full Tilt and the subsequent backlash over online gambling in the US. I didnt fully enter until march of 2012 tho and even then I only lurked around this forum under another account. Meh..I am mono logging...
So, comparing and contrasting war stories is not a bad endeavor, and hopefully our memories can stay somewhat consistent because with the passage of time, sometimes we can begin to remember history differently or even emphasize different aspects of history. Regarding BTC accumulation: It really seems that you accomplished your initial accumulation much faster than me, because my initial accumulation took a year from late 2013 to late 2014. Regarding memory of finding out about bitcoin: A keep searching my memory about this and it is a strange kind of thing that I knew that I recognized the name bitcoin in August to November 2013 time, and maybe even earlier than that. I recall that in about September 2013, I was researching into investments, and BTC was on my list of things to look into, and I never got to it and I ended up investing into various index funds... like mutual funds in October and November 2013. I guess I was still in the investment research mode because around mid-November 2013, I looked into the BTC matter, and kind of kicked myself for my mutual funds investment and thereafter created a supplemental BTC investment plan... anyhow, after the mutual funds had run a year, I did fold that money into BTC at the end of 2014.. so I guess that part worked out in the longer term. My points are this...JJG, your OG dude...dont sweat it...you are like a fixture on the WO now..your place in history is assured.
I suppose OG status could be understood in various ways.. including hanging out and continuing to post during 2015 WO thread desert land.... hahahahaha ... was pretty lonely around here during those times..  The market will continue to fluctuate..same deal..buy the dips when you can. I strongly feel that we are going to breach 5 figures before we have another dip in the coming weeks. It would not surprise me to have a new ATL for the year but those predicting a long winter...I dont see it.
Personally, I think that we are still in a bull market as long as we stay above $5k-ish.. even with a quick dip down to $3k. On the other hand, if prices go below $3k, then the long winter scenario would become the more plausible scenario. Late Spring and Summer are going to be hot hot hot! Inertia is a funny thing.
Seems to be the more likely scenario.
I have been thinking about the term "Legacy Markets"..thats what our previous global markets are now. Bitcoin and crypto are the future..its here now.
I understand what you are saying, and I largely agree; however, it seems better to attempt to describe legacy and crypto as a likely transitional movement, and your punchline conclusion is likely going to be correct about the future - however, legacy is not going down without a fight and could take quite a long period to play out. |
|
|
|
[edited out]
I love change "bitcoin" anyone. I share this document to bring perspective and awareness by helping those that wish to get rich quick and also those that don't take responsibility for themselves. WE have since 15USD/BTC had an influx of shady groups finding new ways to defraud others. "Fake hardware projects" Fake ICO projects" and now lets clone COIN XYZ and use its name and branding to confuse the newbies into buying our "fork". Fork XYZcash anyone? [http://img0.joyreactor.com/pics/post/full/comics-dilbert-parody-money-799278.gif[/img] I cannot disagree with anything that you say - especially since less than 3% of my crypto portfolio holdings is alts, and half of the value of my alt holdings seems to be due to the fact that I split my Bgold, but I have not cashed out of them, yet. Nonetheless, there still seems to be some need to accept and maneuver the space as it is rather than longing for some kind of pure historical state of affairs that is not likely to return... the cat is out of the bag - or the toothpaste is out of the tube... .. so we gotta deal with that and maneuver and attempt to figure out ways to advantage from those various dynamics, too. Seems that in the long run, honey badger, aka BTC, is likely going to profit from these various crazy dynamics, including crazy kids these days who are losing money through various alt/ICO scams.. At the same time, a lot of snot nosed 14 year olds have been able to acquire Lambos, and even prematurely move out of grandma's basement because of their involvement in the scammy marketing project that we have also referred to as ETH. |
|
|
|
Last time it breached the 200EMA within 9 weeks of ATH was in 2011 and it wasn't as deep.
TERA, you mean a long-term bear market is coming? If so, what is your bottom target: 3.5-4 or closer to the previous ATH, 1.5-2k? I still believe in at least 13-16k bounce short term, price is recovering nicely so far, albeit slowly. I read the recent price action as an accumulation by big players. Ive been saying for months there would be a bounce from 5.5K to the low teens before proceeding with the bear market. The next bottom after that would be 3K. However, it could take a really long time and there would be other bounces off 5.5K first. Ya sure I remember at 20K this board had said bitcoin had matured yada yada and the 'big players were accumulating and manipulating it down to 16K'. As if the world's brightest investors hadnt bought at 1K and below and were suddenly interested at buying at a 1600% premium on top of a bubble at ATH. lol. Dont buy all the bull Do you really think that wall street is one step ahead of everyone and bought in at $1k? That's ridiculous. Some of wall street had only started to notice the existence of bitcoin after it went above $10k.. (coupled with some of the futures news) and bitcoin wasn't even on their radar before that (for a large number of them). A lot of wall street is still very skittish about bitcoin, trying to figure out what it is, and considering that it's liquidity remains way too low for them to develop any kind of financial products around bitcoin... Thus, seems early stages, early early stages, no? You do seem to be describing in absolutist terms that bitcoin is closer to an early 2014 scenario rather than an early 2013 scenario, and you could end up being correct, but currently, I still would suggest that bitcoin is more closely in an early 2013 scenario.. maybe currently, I would place about 65% chance in favor of an early 2013 and 35% chance in favor of an early 2014 scenario..... Many of us remain flexible in our projections about BTC's prices and direction and don't try to proclaim too many legs of price movements in advance, like some kind of divine sorcerer; therefore, if circumstances change, then I will adjust my thinking and perhaps, begin to believe that an early 2014 scenario would become more plausible based on facts and momentum, rather than mere speculative and hopeful proclamations. By the way, if you had not noticed, you have been engaged in hopeful proclamations about bitcoin's supposed bubble ever since BTC prices went above $5k the first time in October, and I recall that you were proclaiming bubble even before that... and you been whining about BTC bubble ever since, which is nothing new. Sure, recently, you have been proclaiming to be correct, now that BTC price finally came down - though that still does not make you a sorcerer, merely because you guessed the stopped clock correctly. Actually, BTC prices have not even come down to your pissed off going above $5k levels, yet.. ... Hopium, Terabera, Hopium. The TA matches 2014 more than 2013. Actually it matches 2011 even more. And why do you assume 'wall street' wants to buy bitcoin? Wall street is already doing what they do best which is to divert attention away to their own fake derivatives, their own coins, and their own stocks. I am not assuming anything. I merely said that they (Wall street types) are looking into Bitcoin, and they did not even know about it before $10k. So how is my statement assuming in regards to their actual investment or their actual pushing this particular price rise - all by themselves? I suppose I am assuming that the more that Wall street types know about bitcoin, the more that their knowing about it could contribute to some kind of bullish impact on bitcoin.. and I am NOT even saying that buying pressure is coming from ONLY one aspect of the market. Even you should realize that Bitcoin is much more than some simple kind of appeal to only one sector.. financialization is ONLY one of the several bitcoin networking effects that may well be in its early infancy stages. You are familiar with the seven network effects that are outlined by Trace Mayer? You need a link? Do you think that those other six network (besides financialization) effects are not important in the overall consideration regarding where bitcoin is at and where it might be going? Do you think that those other six network effects have already sufficiently matured in bitcoin? or do you think that those other six network effects are still too early to potentially influence bitcoin into an early 2013 type scenario. By the way, I like the way you even doubled down (NOT) on your bearishness by suggesting a 2011 scenario (which I think that you are implying that this particular BTC downtrend could be even longer than the one in 2014/2015, which I think is what you mean by your 2011 reference). It is like ongoing that you, Terabeara, take these outrageous positions (like a troll) to spread FUD, and then later, when some semblance of the direction of your prediction moves in a direction of coming true, then you don't hesitate to take full credit for something that you did not even call - because like I mentioned earlier, you had been whining about BTC bubble ever since $5k, and I recall that you were even whining about BTC bubble when you first came back into the thread in 2015 as BTC prices were coming out of the long flat period, it did not take you too long to get back to your bearish talking points (here's your return to the WO post for reference)... Even when you try to act like you have reasonable discussion points, you are flooded with persistent bearish BTC FUD spreading party pooping negativisms. TLDR: TeraBera needs to attend some kind of BTC enlightenment camp that is NOT in the woods, so she can break her ties from bears, but more importantly break her ties from government/corporate shills. INTENSE reform is what seems to be needed for your lost cause status (if there is any possible hope?). |
|
|
|
UPDATE: Note that every difficulty update I use the update this charting details for my own use. I suggest you go ahead and make your own or ask a trusted friend that mines to review it for yourself. Always good to get a 2nd or 3rd opinion.
This is some great information...thank you for sharing and the time you have invested in creating it. +10 WOsMerits This document is for awareness and at the users discretion for educational purposes.
Nothing in the this document shall constitute or be construed as an offering of financial instruments or as investment advice or investment recommendations
(i.e., recommendations as to whether or not to “buy”, “sell”, “hold”, or to enter or not to enter into any other transaction involving any specific interest or interests)
Still puked a bit in my mouth seeing legalize tacked on the end...even tho its smart to CYA. Thanks for that. However true, this is not the community it used to be back before BTC was $1.  Love those days! Change is inevitable, no? Probably 95% of the members of this forum did not know what bitcoin was in 2011 - There are even some members of this forum who got into Bitcoin in 2016 who are considered as OGs by some later arrivals, based on their largely beating the 2017 price run-up... Actually one stressful circumstance could have been attempting to accumulate in 2017 while the price was going up and trying to figure out a plan for accumulation (and I think that we have seen some of the stresses of those later entrants in this thread), but if you had already largely accumulated your BTC and was mostly maintaining your stash (which does not rule out continued accumulation) in 2017, then currently, you should be sitting in pretty territory.. at least from a financial point of view (if you did not panic sell too much BTC at some too early stage), even if you are still spending a considerable amount of time trying to figure out what it is that you invested into, exactly. hahahahahaha By the way, personally, I do not consider myself to be an OG, even though the term is kind of relative, but I might consider someone who entered before 2013 to be an OG of sorts (and you, Sitarow, would likely fit my rough relative timeline categorization of a BTC OG)... |
|
|
|
whalepool all in an uproar about some enormous short liquidation
10,340 BTC
Thunderous squishing sounds, at last. A couple of questions.. 1) If shorts get liquidated at these kinds of prices, that would likely mean that they were entered into in the below $7k territory, and if that much bear money gets liquidated, 2) if that quantity of shorts get's liquidated, wouldn't that provide a certain amount of lessening of the upwards BTC price resistance? I am thinking that we cannot necessarily presume UP from this large liquidation, even though some bearwhales were likely reckt in the process, because other bearwhales could come in and profit through placing further shorts, perhaps? When a short gets liquidated (or even when it gets closed voluntarily by the trader), the person who shorts has to buy bitcoins to pay back the margin. So over 10000 BTC should have some kind of immediate effect. Although how long it lasts is another story. At least that is how it would work at Bitfinex. If it happened at Bitmex, that would not be the case because that is really a derivatives type market, from my understanding. If it was CBOE or CME, those are really cash settled and do not involve the trading of real bitcoins, so the effect would be minimal. I am not sure how OKCOIN, Kraken or the other exchanges that offer margin trading work. What exchange did this happen on? Yes. It would be nice to engage in some more speculation on this topic, if we had more information and perhaps links. You could be correct, Bones, that the effect might be different based on the exchange because of how BIG of a difference of the financial impact that could be caused depending on the policy of the exchange. I am only weakly familiar with margin trading, since I do not employ such a practice myself, yet my understanding is that all value or money for the position is put up front - so whether you close the position early or you are forced out of the position by market movement, you have already put up whatever money is needed in order to cover those kinds of eventualities, and you would perhaps end up losing that extra money that is put up whether it is for exchange costs or to pay back whoever had made the loan. Any better description of the overall process or the specifics of this situation would be helpful, here. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
