Next thing we see, bitcoin is off the chart with a "solo-mined" asterisk

I estimate a need of around 15-20 hours to update the Wiki and FAQ to current information as a lot of that stuff have been rendered obsolete over time, while new questions and content must be added to cover new and planned features. Thing is, I'm running extremely low on spare time as of late and that means it will require a bit of crowdfunding so that I can offload some other work and start with it.

A currency can be deflationary and be used in parallel with other currencies that are inflationary. Just because one currency is -relatively- deflationary, doesn't mean that the economy goes to deflation.

The "bitcoin = deflationary = bad because deflationary economies don't work" argument is flawed because it is based on the assumption that national economies are based on bitcoin, when they aren't.

Even if bitcoin was the sole currency worldwide, the major problem would not be the currency, but the fiat debt scheme that needs to be "serviced" with interest - something that a finite money supply doesn't allow. The unserviceable levels of debt are a far bigger problem than the currency. Inflationary currencies just make debt more "viable" in order to perpetuate debt-slavery for nations and individuals. And this is not predicted to stop anytime soon.

There is also a bright side: Annual inflation, at these rates, will require just <300mn USD per year. If price was ~1000 USD or 10000 USD right now, it would take 1.3bn - 13bn just to keep price level.

Ideally you want coin distribution to be done as cheaply as possible, in order to not drain investment capital and then you proceed with the "pump" when inflation is not an issue or a lesser issue.

If you pump while coin distribution is still in place, and it's proceeding at a fast rate, then you need too much money to sustain the price.

We'll see what the price does a few months after the next halving...

Too much inflation - the price has to be lowered to be more sustainable. At current prices, LTC will require 14mn / year just to absorb the new LTCs when DASH's entire marketcap is at 16mn.

You think that most national currencies, outside of EUR, GBP, USD, CHF etc, are "sustainable"? Some countries experience severe currency devaluation like 10-20-30% or more per year. Gold, silver, bitcoins, even mechanic or electronic equipment can be a "parachute" to inflation and devaluation.

The price also doesn't matter in transactions that have to do with individuals outside the banking system. For example if a kid wants to sell his game account or a game item to an online friend of him, he can use bitcoin to the equivalent price-target. Say the kid asks 1000$ for the game account in bitcoins... whether it's 1 BTC = 1000$, or 4 BTC = 1000$ (BTC = 250$), it doesn't matter.

Then the kid can spend this 1000$ (in Bitcoins) through the online retailers, or make it fiat or gold/silver through retailers that accept BTC if he is fearful that the price might slide. But the transaction will be at the appropriate value.

So when trolls say that "dev is gone", and dev is here, they are not trolling or fudding, just "warning people"

Last year I said that at 28800 coins per day X 10$ per LTC, it would take more than 100mn USD to absorb its annual inflation and sustain it's price (marketcap around 250-300mn USD). Inflation predictably killed them as it's unsustainable.

SDC is kind of shooting itself in the foot with the emphasis on the upcoming market instead of marketing itself as a unique anonymous coin. That's a lot to do with the members on this thread who are pumping the market instead of what already exists as an anonymous solution that can be used right now. It's like the good things are "coming" when they are already here.

Relatively speaking, I can't see why cryptonote coins can have >10mn in combined marketcap, and SDC only 1mn when it's based on the more compatible bitcoin code.

Ok we'll have to disagree then. People are free to think their own scenarios. But making hundreds of BTCs is no easy process, especially for pumpers - because regular holders are dumping on them as they pump. So in order to make profit you have to dump higher than what you bought.

There are investors that can be attracted to ease the single-handed load of pumping a coin yourself, so that you can dump on them if price goes (much) higher, but you'll certainly not make a profit if you sell at rock bottom. So... the motive for selling at sub-100k satoshi is not profit taking, when you can sell at 200 or 300k. And the scenario where these pumpers are making hundreds of BTCs against the noobs -but they aren't very bright either so that's why they are dumping lots of coins at a loss-, is not making much sense.

68k dumping is not rational profit taking. Period. This was done to crush price. As far as I'm concerned the only question is why.

You may have a different answer than me, but refusing to say it was an intentional price crush is avoiding the truth.

I've seen irrational dumps in the past (way past the point of overselling a coin), and they are mostly related to stolen / hacked money, hacked exchanges etc. This doesn't seem to be the case here though.

4k satoshi = 22 BTC marketcap... or ~5000$. lol

1. Selling at 68k is not generating maximum profit. So there is something wrong here.
2. Pumpers aren't gods to do anything.
3. Yes there were large orders above 500k, no need to sell at 68k. It's irrational. This was done on purpose to crash price with a thin order book at the bottom.

So the pumper / dumper were also ...stupid... but they made money from the people, or... they lost money (because they are stupid) - whatever... The narrative doesn't add up.

What I see here is simple: There was nothing bad to say against the coin, no actual FUD to throw at it, so someone pumped & dumped at a cost (for him), to throw the "p&d" accusation at it. "Oh people are losing money", "it's a pump & dump like the rest" etc etc.

Like if some "investors" come along and take ANY coin (including bitcoin, litecoin etc) and pump it & dump it, it's somehow the coin's fault.

Then, once the label sticks that it was "just a P&D", cheap accumulation can take place.

If he was selling above 500k, why wasn't the price crashing and instead got to 800k / pump-style? The argument doesn't make sense.

Dump down to 68k when you know you are killing it / overselling it and it rebounded to 350k a while thereafter? No. There is nothing classic here.

It doesn't explain selling at 68k when a few minutes ago it was 800k. This is not rational profit-taking, nor classic pump & dump pattern. Some might show the cloak chart, but cloak failed its internal review, so it had fundamental issues that triggered its crash - there is nothing similar here.

24hr trade volume exceeds marketcap of the coin. That's how low the marketcap is / how oversold the price is.

Explain to me why a pumper would spend so many BTCs pumping the price to 800k and then ...dumping down to ...68k, in order to crush the price instead of maximizing BTC profit.

It's impossible for the pumper to have made any money on this.

The only profit comes from attacking the coin's price and confidence, leveling it at much lower levels, where re-purchasing the same quantity or higher quantity of coins can take place @ lower cost.

This scheme can only work if people dump at 100-200-300k etc, otherwise the pumper/dumper lost his BTCs to the casual investors.