Inca made very good points - b/c the truth of the matter is that a drop in BTC prices is NOT inevitable, NO matter what the TA may tell you.  Each side can make arguments as to the validity of his/her TA (and some people do NOT believe in the efficacy of TA), but people can also say that the TA is bullshit b/c it could also reasonably be considered to be quite a leap for others to be suggesting that BTC prices are going to continue to decline beyond where they are at today.

Neither case of going up or going down is inevitable, but it is NOT a strawman to suggest alternate viewpoints or to suggest that relying on TAs does NOT bring any inevitable conclusions.

Yes, your desire to "keep it simple" caused you to lose your own objectivity and to over generalize, to be offensive and to simply come to the wrong conclusions.

Are you coaching yourself here?   

I do NOT want to assume anything, but it seems to me that you may be a little frustrated to have to defend your comment because you are internally of the belief that it is so obviously an objective fact that bitcoin followers are cultish, and NOT an insult to be calling people in this thread cultists.  Just because it has some basis in truth, and you can find some of the pointed out behaviours in the real world does NOT make the conclusion correct.  A lot of myths have some basis in reality.  A lot of propaganda has some basis in reality.  A lot of trolling comments have some basis in reality.  Merely because some observed conclusions have some basis in reality does NOT make them true.



I do think so.  You are trying to simplify matters, and you are trying to suggest that a large number of people who are pro-bitcoin have NO brains. 



You do NOT have numbers because the accusation is based on purely anecdotal evidence.  Surely, cultish can mean a lot of different things, but it does have a definition and the definition is generally derogatory and applied to religious behavior.  Bitcoin is NOT a religion and NOT religious behavior, even though there may be some examples in which you can point to people within bitcoin who are demonstrating those same kinds of behaviours.  Even though you can point to that kind of behavior in various bitcoin communities, that mere fact does NOT meet the cultish definition for the group or to say “many in here” are cultish goes to imply that coltishness is some kind of wide-spread phenomenon in bitcoin.

So what?  Some people are going to demonstrate irrational exuberance with all kinds of their investments, and bitcoin should be no different than that.  At what price did he invest in bitcoin?  Is he currently at a profit or a loss?  If he is holding long term, then great, he may be ahead at some point in the near future.  But with any investment, he may lose the amount that he invested.  The fact that people agree with his investment does NOT prove that it is a cult, either, it proves that they have confidence that the odds are good for btc prices to go up.  For example, if you invest $1000 in bitcoin, you could lose $1000 or you could potentially gain $100,000 or some in between result could occur.  The mere fact that someone is betting the farm on bitcoin does NOT necessarily mean that bitcoin is a cult or that his behavior was cultish.  It depends on the circumstances of that particular case.


 








So what?  Surely there are some people who think that it is impossible for bitcoin to go to zero, but I would think that would be an exception.  I would think that most here would admit that there are real possibilities that bitcoin could go to zero, but they put the odds of that very low.  That does NOT make them a cult, even though some people here may from time to time be inarticulate or incomprehensible when making their response to any given situation (myself included).  Sometimes we talk in extreme terms or exaggerate our positions to make a point – even though if push comes to shove we may NOT be 100% wedded to the point that we are making.  Some comments are spins, some comments are visceral reactions and some comments are very well thought through.  In a streaming forum, you are going to get a wide array of reactions, and do NOT expect all of the reactions to be well thought through or a reflection of the posters true and deep down feelings or beliefs.




Yes, agreed that this kind of thing could happen with bitcoin and cause considerable logistical difficulties and possibly even completely destroy some or all of the value in the bitcoin holders.  Again, so what?  How likely is this to happen?  Does this possibility mean that I should sell my BTC today?  I am personally diversified, and NOT everyone is diversified in a balanced way… but so what?  People take risks, and some of us (probably many of us) are NOT technologically sophisticated enough to really understand the various technological components of bitcoin and to assess the likelihood of a blockchain reset.  Even technological people do NOT understand all aspects of bitcoin when it comes to dealing with all possibilities of human corruption or the abilities of humans to employ quantum computing or social engineering to undermine or to destroy or to manipulate bitcoin in various ways. 
Merely because we do NOT understand it and merely because we dismiss various potentially valid arguments does NOT make us cultish.

 




You may know that bitcoin is being attacked in various ways and bitcoin is a threat in various ways to many status quo forces.  There may be some we behavior going on and attempts to rally solidarity, but in the end, there are a lot of individuals who are making decisions for themselves.  Some people my follow andreas antonopolis (or some other bitcoin enthusiasts/evangelists) and to listen to everything that he says… so what?    Sometimes, trust is built, but are we going to drink coolaide when they tell us to drink coolaide.  Some will, but so what?  Overall, there is NOT that much control over “many.”  “Many” have considerable confidence that bitcoin is going to continue to prosper and to expand and to go up in prices.  “Many” also hope and pray that BTC goes up in prices so that they can make a lot of money… so what?  These behaviors are NOT cultish, just because you and others in the mainstream media keep repeating that they are cultish. 




So you are trying to suggest that you see reality better than other people? You and Blitz.  You guys/gals are objective and the rest of us are delusional?  Get off your high horse.  Many people go through the same kinds of mixed feelings as you an blitz – though maybe others are NOT so presumptive to begin to call others names because of their knowledge level.  Surely, there are several levels of knowledge, and sometimes people just go forward with their investment choice of buy or hodl based on faith, but so what?  Some people also may NOT have a lot of time to investigate, and they will invest based on what others are doing.  Some also engage in wishful thinking and select the facts that they want to be true… and in the end, there is a lot of variety in knowledge levels and what facts people are going to recognize as being true or plausible.




Yes.  It is both confrontational and wrong to call “most in here” as cultish.  It’s denigrating and it is an oversimplification, and playing into mainstream propaganda.  Even though there is some truth to the myth, you are wrong to be propagating this kind of bullshit framework in order to denigrate people who come from a variety of persepctives and many of whom would like to come to these kinds of threads and to participate in these kinds of threads in order to become better informed about bitcoin – rather than to be denigrated, merely because they may be enthusiastic about the prospects of bitcoin.

This whole interchange seems quite stupid, and only entertaining in terms of its lack of coherence.

Your description of bitcoin enthusiasts as "cultists" denigrates and robs participants of this thread of an ability to engage in meaningful communications.  I have difficulties understanding how a mod here can view the bitcoin community within such a polarizing framework.  You, as a mod, should realize that the bitcoin community is much more nuanced than this supposed black and white framework in which you seem to be attempting to put its participants.

It is misleading baloney to suggest "many in here" are cultists...   By many do you mean 100?  It is also degrading and disingenuous to suggest "many in here" are cultists.   

That's ridiculous.  NOW, you are being patronizing.. attempting to suggest that you are somehow coming from a place of higher knowledge.  You certainly do NOT know enough about me in order to come to those kinds of conclusions, even if you did happen to read all of my posts on this forum  Additionally, I have already experience several of your responses that tend to inform me that even if you had read all of my posts, either you did NOT understand half of their content or you are purposefully failing to take into account half of their content.

You seem to be wasting my time, your time and the time of anyone who may happen to be reading this interchange between us with your purported attempts to teach.

I do find it kind of difficult to fathom that a mod is spreading this boloney crap information regarding bitcoin and denigrating bitcoin advocates.  Even your signature misstates what is FUD.  FUD stands for Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt.  Why do you want to mislead people about the meaning of FUD? 

DID some bank owner or govt official take over your account to spread misinformation?  As you should know, spreading does a disservice to people participating in this thread and this forum.

YEAH... STOP IT, CHECK07!!!!!  Jorge had a monopoly on that monopoly statement.   

Where did you read this?


Sounds like you are parroting some FUD line.

At what price point would have you shorted?  We have been floating between $430 and $460 for more than 2 weeks, so if you really expect a crash, what  is the difference between shorting now at $430 instead of $460.. NOT much different.

Personally, i am NOT as confident as you are purporting to be about some inevitable fall in prices - even though a fall in prices is possible, I do NOT want to get screwed in the event that prices do NOT fall... safer in my view to HODL...

I did NOT know that there was any one chart that everyone agreed upon.  I am NOT even sure if everyone agrees that the sun is coming up in the east, tomorrow.   

Yes, it is possible that I used words that were stronger than necessary to make my point; however, without really being able to put my finger on the situation, exactly, I am getting the sense that you are being quite disingenuous with your pursuit to engage me in various topics, including this one.  So maybe my language was a bit stronger than it needed to be - even though I was attempting to be descriptive of my frustration that you seemed to have been purposefully missing various points attempting to describe matters in ways other than what they were.  In the end, I think my response was appropriate and within a context in which the response seems to fit.





I am NOT bothered by some antagonism, too, b/c I expect some of this to take place whether forums are strict or not there is going to be antagonism b/c we are dealing with quasi-anonymous posts. 

Yes, I stated my opinion that the forum would be better with more policing and/or elimination of trolls.  However, I do NOT really expect it to change anytime soon b/c there seems to be considerable tolerance for trolls in this forum.  I will deal with the antagonism, but I remain unafraid to express my preference for better moderation.

Thanks for outlining that b/c that is what I am talking about.  It is possible, but NOT likely, and the only way I am going to get a flight from California to Brazil for .01BTC  in less than 24 hours would be to peg the BTC payment based on BTC's likely future value in the coming years.    So, let's say a private funded flight to Brazil would be around $10k to $20K, then in order to pay with .01 BTC, then 1 BTC would have to be valued at $1 million to $2 million.

Attention everyone: Jorge has turned Bull!!!!!

For example?   If I call your ideas or your conclusions "stupid-ass," I am NOT calling you stupid ass... I am suggesting that your argument is baseless or lacking facts or lacking logic or does NOT follow from the information that is known. 

So I am NOT sure what you mean about me NOT leading by example? I rarely engage in personal attacks of other posters, besides suggesting some of their ideas are fucked (or some other explicative).  ONLY sometimes I get pissed off a little bit more than may be necessary at someone pursuing a bunch of silly ass ideas and/or seeming to want to argue, just for the sake of argument.

You may be correct that from time to time I go too far  in my comments, and I could be a little more polite.  That is possible.  However, a problem with having a forum without rules is that it becomes contagious to engage in this kind of conduct (or potentially a disadvantage if a poster refrains from it) or even irresistibly tempting to throw out a few extra explicative, here and there.   

You know the expression that it may NOT be very useful to bring a knife to a gun fight.  Accordingly, the rule of the community sometimes affects conduct.

Ultimately, I believe for the most part I am fairly restraint in the area of personal attacks that I make or my stating conclusions without some basis.  I am pretty minimal with FUD-like spreading... so I would like to hear what you believe from you assessment of the situation that I do or say that is NOT leading by example?

NOPE... that is NOT what I am saying.  I figured that you wanted to come up with some ludicrous conclusion, and with your stupid-ass conclusion, YOU have proven me correct in my expectation(s) of what you were going to do.

In several of your posts, you seem to be a very smart guy/gal, but sometimes you come up with some doosies of bad logic in attempt to arrive at your wished-for conclusion(s).

I will remind you that I did make a statement earlier, however, that it appeared to me that the rules in this forum must be pretty lax when it comes down to it b/c the moderator had seemed to admit to making statements with a purpose to inflame other posters. 

I still maintain that there should be a rule against making inflammatory statements to other posters; however, if there is NOT such a rule currently in place, then the rule would need to be made and publicized before it could/should be enforced.  Personally, I am NOT inclined to attempt to enforce a rule that is NOT fairly in place.

Congrats.  Is that on Stamp?   Maybe you will be pulling those orders by, when?  next week or two weeks from now? 

I have my reservations about reaching $405, but I have NO real idea regarding the price movement in the next couple of weeks... I would actually buy some at $405, too. 

Yet, I would actually lean towards BTC staying in the $420 to $470 range.. absent some further news... and surely we are going to get some news out of China on or before May 10th.... (they have the bitcoin summit starting on the 10th)

Yeah... maybe that is a good idea.

At least posts in this thread should somehow be related to bitcoin b/c the last I checked the topic of this thread is BTC/USD....

There are other threads in this forum that deal with other topics, including various alt coins.

I know some of you FUD spreaders and some of the other thread trolls engage in considerable lengthy posting activities to attempt to distract the thread from its stated topic and also to sometimes cause us to pursue meaningless side tangents in this thread... for example, to get us to spend a lot of time talking about some topic that has a 1 in a million chance of happening as if the odds were much higher.  You, Jorge, seem to like to do this with some of your negative speculations, to explore matters that are theoretically possible but are about as likely as my getting struck by lightning in Brazil in the next 24 hours.  Sure it is possible, but NOT very likely since I am in California, and I do NOT even have plans to go to Brazil in the near future.

What good does it do for me to name names?  I am NOT the owner, or the op or a moderator.


And, if for some reason I were to become one of those, for the sake of this hypothetical, I would republish the rules in order that all members have NOTICE of the rules.  At this point the rules of the forum are NOT very prominent, and if there are NO rules, I could NOT warn anybody - unless, whatever was DONE defied all common sense. 

I am NOT going to go down the road of naming any names b/c this exercise is a big waste of time, and if I were in such a positions, I would have to look case by case to which posts are offensive and thereafter what was the offense frequency and how bad was it... then to formulate the warning based on the post(s).  These would likely need to be made in a fairly timely manner, as well... So if a poster had been offensive, but then had reformed his/her ways, then that poster may NO longer merit any warning.

The owner of the forum makes decisions as to how much trolling is allowed.

Personally, I would NOT delete or allow the deletion or editing of posts except under very rare circumstances....

Also, I am of the opinion that banning cannot take place, if the users do NOT know the rules or that what they did is offensive, so they would have to be clearly informed of the rules.  They may be warned before they are banned depending on the egregiousness of the behavior... or whether they are accepting to follow the rules in the future. ... At this point, I do NOT have enough information to name any user(s) that should be banned or that has been egregiously been breaking rules in particular b/c if they have NOT been warned or told what they are doing is offensive, then that would NOT be fair to ban or suspend them.

Again, ultimately the owner(s) of the forum makes these kinds of decisions, so the above is merely my own speculation based on your question.