I used to agree with this, until a few years ago.  I no longer believe that statement to be true.

Your position is a little bit ridiculous, Jorge.  In essence you are claiming that you do NOT want to be a pawn of the bitcoin system.    You need to invest at least .1BTC in bitcoin.. just to experience it.... and to be a more credible scholar.   Your supposed sitting on the sidelines and preserving objectivity makes little to no sense.... and surely you are smarter than that.  So dig in and become more invoremed and become more credible in the BTC world.

You are talking baloney, Jorge, by attempting to give so much weight to China.  Surely they have had an effect on price, but the effect is NOT as big as you seem to be making it out to be.   Even you were GOX obsessed for several weeks, and NOW you are China obsessed b/c you seem to be turning this subject and spin into a form of FUD spreading.

The earlier advertisement of the BTC Summit that I saw a few weeks ago had listed several prominent members of the various exchanges as presenters.  The most recent listing of presenters showed only a couple of prominent presenters.  They won't need a very big room, and maybe they will NOT need any break out sessions.  The big name presenters may run out of things to say after half a day, and they will just have question / answer sessions.

I saw that too.  It seems pretty last minute and pretty bearish.

Hopium.  I concede that I have that affliction, too.

A trendline, to the extent to which it exists, becomes more apparent after the passage of time, and you could be correct that there is NO trendline.  I am putting my money on that there is a trendline and BTC prices are going to move up.

How about you?  Are you putting any money into BTC? 

So far, I am NOT putting more money into BTC than I am willing to lose, but I am putting in more than I had originally planned to put in.... The reason that I am putting more into BTC is b/c I am more informed about bitcoin today than I was 5 months ago.

Yes, in theory shorting could be profitable.  However, NOT a good time to short now b/c BTC prices seem to be way below the BTC price trend line.

In this regard, it can be good to short when btc prices are above the trend line and to buy when btc prices are below the trendline. 

Certainly, we have a variety of views concerning where is the trendline, exactly. 

Personally, I am NOT very sophisticated in my trading, but I would put the current BTC trendline in the $650 to $850 arena.  I have seen others making claims that the btc trend line is much higher than what I am saying.  You could also assess the BTC trendline to be much lower; nonetheless, at $425-ish, in many accounts of the trendline, we are still much below the trendline..

IN sum, this particular moment does NOT appear to be a good time to short - absent some certain news that BTC prices are going to go down by 5-15%.  i have NOT seen any such news, even though I have seen considerable fear mongering in that direction to suggest that for sure BTC prices are going down.  I remain NOT very confident in such a prediction.

That is pretty hilarious... to achieve reversal of ignore status.       I can definitely appreciate that people get frustrated with the numerous posts in this thread that seem to meander.  I try to make my post substantive and contributory, yet I understand that sometimes, my posts will turn people off - especially if they are responding to some random matter that does NOT even seem to relate to the theme of the thread.

Sorry Adam... hahahaha .   








All three articles tend to show a pattern of behavior in which the connected people tend to get away with a lot more than the unconnected people.  I appreciate that in theory, bitcoin and other crypto-currencies can disrupt the policies, practices and procedures of the status quo institutions, yet the achievement of more "just" institutions and practices is NOT a given.

I think that a lot of people who are into bitcoin recognize ways in which bitcoin can address some of the injustices of society, yet many of us hopefully "early" adopters also believe that appreciation of bitcoin prices could also help us personally to be financially above the fray, to some extent.

I personally believe that we need to remain somewhat sophisticated in our participation in and our approach to bitcoin by diversifying our assets and investments in such a way that we can hopefully profit from the adoption of bitcoin while at the same time take safeguards from being an easy target of various governmental and/or institutional hostilities when we are attempting to advocate, employ or apply the disruptive aspects of bitcoin.

I do agree with you to the extent that we seem to be transitioning into some uncertain state of affairs that could get messy b/c of the fact that bitcoin (and other crypto currencies) are disruptive to the status quo.  Certainly, I do NOT feel that I have a very clear vision regarding how the struggle is going to play out, and I would NOT put it past various governmental and corporate institutions to engage in various co-optation tactics.  There will also be areas in which these entities are NOT able to co-opt and areas of ambiguity in which some semblance of freedom could prevail.  I would NOT want to predict too soon about whether and/or who suffers bloody battles or paradise(s) within this evolving new social order... but we likely know that the haves and the haves not tend to come out differently with any evolving change to the status quo.

I do NOT have a whole hell-of-a-lot of fiat to spare, but I would prefer to buy a little more BTC. 

About an hour ago, I bought some at $421, and I would buy more, but I want to save  my  Fiat in the event that prices go below $400.... I really have my doubts, but who knows? 

I have been thinking that maybe the downward trend would last only until 5/10 - then we will get some kind of positive or at least some neutral announcement in connection with the global bitcoin summit in shanghai on that 5/10 date?

That will be a real bummer for china and their 5/10 bitcoin summit if they are merely having presentations about all the bad BTC news in china...

I believe that you are again changing the subject - b/c I made my statement in response to the articles links referenced by Aminorex's post.   I am still a little bit unclear about the point that Aminorex was attempting to make by posting the links to those articles.   

BJA:  I agree with your point that the govt is NOT monolithic.. but I remain unclear about the relevance of your "tin pot dictator" assessment or your suggestion that "we" are attempting to win something - which seems to be referring to transitioning to libertarianism... and those latter points, though interesting in themselves do NOT seem to be the reason that Aminorex referenced those articles.

They really seem to be talking out of both sides of their mouth... and accordingly engaging in selective enforcement tactics, which is NOT anything new.. to pick off the most vulnerable in society and pick off the most easy to target folks.

Since we seem to have completely exhausted those topics, then maybe we will be forced to talk about the excitement of BTC  price volatility? 

And, on that topic, I am NOT sure about what to say but I have been thinking that the Chinese are purposefully holding out on some BTC news that will be announced at the bitcoin Global summit in Shanghai on 5/10... Or, maybe the BTC news will just be to give us another date  so BTC prices can remain in stagnation for a few more months?

The reason that i accuse you of being disingenuous is b/c you tend to engage in interrogations concerning topics that are either irrelevant or only tangentially relevant, and sometimes you seem to purposefully ignore some facts (or you come to conclusions based on the facts that you have, which are incomplete).  So, why do you want to pursue such interrogations?  Apparently, you are entertained by such, and possibly you see it as a challenge. 
Probably, I am willing to go along with it, too much by granting that there could be some useful purpose to addressing your various points.      

I think that i have already made my point several times, and that is that more strict enforcement of prohibition of trolling rules and prohibition of non-substantive attacks would be better for the forum.  That is my point, and i am NOT the owner or affiliated, so I Have NO authority or influence.  The owner chooses NOT to have rules or to enforce any rules.  The owner has complete discretion about who to ban and about how much emphasis to put in such banning.  In this case, it seems that the owner has decided that having rules and enforcing such rules would NOT be worth the effort.



I DOUBT that Davyd05 was specifically referring to you.  Likely, he was merely suggesting that I have too much of a history and habit of engaging in long texts with posters who appear to be trolls and such texts are a waste of time - even to read.

    ?

Thnx 

I do NOT disagree with the above statement, and I believe the above statement is NOT inconsistent with anything that I said.




I doubt that anyone can read this whole thread with thoroughness, there are too many posts.  So likely many of us skim, and we will look at some posters more closely than others, or we may get caught by some ideas more than others.





I am NOT sure where how you are concluding that I am “distraught?”  I merely made a statement that a person cannot really know you from your posts.  I have made that same assertion in other contexts.  Octaft and others sometimes attempt to conclude too much from the posts of others, and I have experienced that. It does NOT make me distraught, but sometimes, I would like to point out when a conclusion is going too far and is NOT based on facts or actuality.

I did suggest that Octaft is being disingenuous during times when he is reaching conclusions that are NOT based on the record.  I did NOT suggest that he was NOT coming from a place of higher knowledge, but that it is insulting when he put on the hat as if he were suggesting that he is coming from a place of higher knowledge.  Really, it is NOT possible to put on such a hat, if a poster does NOT know enough of the relevant facts and to assume knowledge of facts that are NOT on the table.





Seems that the “NOT” and other all caps emphasis is stylistic, and the vulgar language from time to time may be stylistic or it may be that at that particular writing moment, that particular vulgar word seems to make my point the best (or at least better than other possible words).  I am NOT a poet, so I may get the vulgar word wrong, from time to time, and I am sure that if I were to go back to edit my fucking posts ("fucking" added for humor), those posts would suffer from considerable rewriting (and likely shortening).  NONETHELESS, the posts attempt to capture my sentiment of the moment, and they are likely longer and/or wordier than necessary… because frequently, I do NOT go back and re-read them before hitting “post.”

Being blunt is fine, and you have a right to have your opinion.  From your prior posts, I had already had a pretty good idea about you position regarding moderation of the forum and the thread, but really neither of has said too much on this topic even though we have made a lot of posts about it in the last couple of days.  More or less, you have been suggesting that you are happy with the status quo level of moderation, and I had been suggesting that more moderation would likely weed out some of the extensive trolling to make the forum better.  But I believe this dialogue began with my comment that Blitz, as a moderator, admitted that he was posting merely to incite other posters - which irritated me, coming from a mod.

Regarding my prior posts:  I would expect that some of my posts have more value than others and some posts are better written than others (and possibly some are not very helpful or very well written), and people also have varying perceptions concerning what they perceive as valuable or helpful in a post.