Odds are 50/50 then?

Usually guys with any kind of serious poll proposal will tend to be a wee bit more concrete in the formulation of the poll, and surely some poll questions are better than others.

I already mentioned that I doubt that guys (and gal) in this thread have a whole hell of a lot of sympathy for no coiners and/or low coiners, but confirming the answer to that question does not even seem that important.

I think that we have seen quite a few sad cases come through this thread over the years, but overall bitcoin has been a bullish asset and seems to continue to be a bullish asset, so surely guys might judge anyone who manages to lose money on an overall bullish asset - even though we know that some of the corrections and bearish trends can be quite brutal - and really set some guys (and gal) into depression - and perhaps for reasons in which they are trying to become rich (or prevent their lil selfies from becoming poor) at a faster pace than king daddy seems willing to facilitate.

Several of us had been recommending that the entry-level goals for BTC accumulation could have been reasonably set at something like 0.21BTC, and with these low low prices (aka bargain prices) we might be able to temporarily ramp up that entry-level BTC accumulation back up to 1 BTC.. at least for a wee bit of time- unless Torque's theory of the going to $30k and subsequent UPPity from there ends up playing out - which might thereafter again cause entry-levels of 1 BTC to be less achievable.

Sometimes I consider my own approach to be fairly constant with only a few small tweaks here and there along the way, but even in the past 24 hours I made some further tweaks - which probably puts me at about 7 somewhat beyond expectations tweaks since about mid-May.. Sometimes I am not even more than 50% comfortable to share very many specifics in regards to how to characterize the tweaks while in the midst of them (except maybe a wee bit of directionality - that I had done regarding the prior 6 tweaks) - yet sometimes I will also wait to make certain disclosures until maybe several months afterwards to state the extent to which some tweaks were a good idea or not.. or how much I ended up benefiting from that (as a trade off to the costs, if any)...

I do also know a stubborn fuck in real life who has been negatively affected by using a leverage product.. and I have made several interactions, and likely more BTC ends up getting lost (by that person) than we are really able to discuss because people want to be private about those kinds of things, and I am not even trying to emphasize too much of the "I told you so" angle.. even though there is some unstated judgement can be read in regards to our interactions...

In the end, I am not even sure about a fair poll question, except maybe something like:

Has your BTC stash increased, decreased or stayed the same from our drop from $35k (around May 6th / May 7th) to present?  That would be ONLY 3 possible answers, no? 

Do we get anywhere with a poll like that?  I do believe it is better than asking whether we like low coiners/no coiners.

Another possible good question would be by the time we get back to $35k (whenever that is) do you expect to have more BTC, less BTC or the same amount of BTC that you had at about the time of our May 6th/May 7th price drop below $35k?

A problem with this second question is that it involves the potential for a distance between what ends up happening and what the member believes is going to happen.

There might not even be any particular correct answer for either of the questions, except that if someone is in accumulation stage, maintenance stage or liquidation stage then the answer should be somewhat reflective of what stage s/he is in.. .. I mean that whether increase, the same or decrease has happened should be close to matching whether the member is in accumulation, maintenance or liquidation status.   Otherwise something may well have gone wrong, no? Am I not correct?

What are the odds of that particular scenario?  Surely less than 22.4367911%, no?

Even the April to June 2019 price run went up from $4.2k to $13,880 - Ie 3.5x, but ended up coming back down to $6.2k - even absent our March 2020 covid downity bonus... I am thinking that we had more positive macro circumstances back then and also just a wee bit less froth the the shitcoin space and also in the various leveraging catastrophes space... lot's of insolvent entities still seem to be faking their solvency... so maybe they won't have to sell any more of their BTC to cover, perhaps? perhaps?


I have to stand up for Richie_Teeeee here.

He is a recovering BIG blocker nutjob, and accordingly he has relapses from time to time, including but not limited recalling: 1) what year it is, 2) what epoch we are in, 3) what block chain (and/or thread) he participating in  4) CB is not his best friend in the whole world and/or 5) the sheer power of my lil precious.  

So, he just needs some kind of batslappening or something equivolent once in a wwwweeeee while and thereafter he will be as good as new (well kind of like refurbished, but still) for a few weeks.


Don't be trying to ween yours truly nor dat dere udder peep nedur!!!!!!  

 

That wuld be no way to be winnin friends in dees here parts.  if you know what is good for uie pooie.  And that's not no threat, nedur.

Ok.  That all makes sense.  

I see that you don't have very strong feelings around such topic either way.

I have no problem with what you are saying.. or that you have an opinion that accused people are not very good people based on what you believe to be the facts (but convicted and executed?) prior to a trial.. and so in that regard it seems a wee bit different to be presenting damning information about all dee bad things that peeps did on the interwebs versus allowing a public trial..   You do not really wish her well, do you?  You don't wish that she is actually able to defend herself in a public trial, right?

Perhaps there might be concerns about what might come out if an actual public trial were to take place?

Sure, it is theoretically possible that there will be no new ATH ever again, but you are surely talking about a pretty low-likely edge case, and even kind of presuming that BTC needs BIG players in order to achieve another ATH.

Bitcoin remains the most powerful for the smaller players or the structually disadvantaged folks, and surely some of the smaller players and structurally disadvantaged folks have a shitton of capital when amalgamated together..

Gresham's law will continue to gravitate value into BTC and surely the more sophisticated BIG players know that and they are front running retail and will continue to do so.  Sure there are going to continue to be weak as fuck BIG players who are able to come in with more coins and to dump more coins than the earlier smaller players, but I doubt that the fact that we merely have bigger players showing that they can frequently be weaker hands than the most feeble of the FOMO driven retail gamblers does not likely change the calculus too much in terms of the inevitability of bitcoin ongoing Gresham law superior money dynamics, even if they have all kinds of more sophisticated tools to manipulate and bet against bitcoin.. they still have abilities to get bit in the ass when playing with those tools with a bearer instrument asset like my lil precious, too.


Much better presentation than we tend to see from some folks in these here parts.. arriemoller... cough cough..

I am not confident that bitcoiner are fruitarians, though.

Are you sure that you did not get that image from some ESG-promoting page?  In other words, where's the beef?

I am starting to feel like a Wendy's promoter.. "Where's the beef?" reference.

doubting thomas..  


Bitcoin no doesn't work like that.



Bitcoin no doesn't work like that, either.


I am not sure how fruitful it is to remember who said what in terms of the blocksize limitation wars, even though surely from time to time it does come in handy to see those kinds of historical stances that various people/businesses took.

I am pretty sure that jbreher was a bcasher and then pretty much got stuck in the Bcash SV camp, and surely some of that makes little sense because who the fuck would consider that any forkening of Bcash that was promoted/funded by Wright/Ayers would have any semblance of legitimacy but jbreher frequently proclaimed that peeps could still support BcashSV without having to agree with the various claims of Wright et al.

I am pretty sure that jbreher was supporting all of the BIG blocker nonsense from the start - back to late 2015 when Gavin would spout out the various talking points about a need for a path forward and doing all the stuffs on layer one.. so there seems to have been a time in which segwit was proposed and so many of them thought that it was a decent compromise - even Gavin, but then the code was written in early 2016 and then went on testnet and seems that in about mid-2016 once the segwit code went into its ready to be merged stage then a bunch of the BIGblocker dweebs started to proclaim that segwit was not good any longer, and so that escalated into the time around the NYA in early 2017, no? (there was a HongKong agreement, too, right?  weren't they mad because the devs would not accept the hong kong agreement so therefore new coalition formed that resulted in the NYA?)..

Anyhow, yeah, I cannot remember jbreher deviating from any of those BIGblocker partyline talking points to any great extent including remaining a Bcash SV supporter but then kind of going on silent mode in the past year or so.. but yeah, he seemed to support the NYA as a great compromise.  If you recall, the vast majority of the strong vocal BIG blocker dweebs did not even care that much about the technical aspects of the big blocker nonsense whether the NYA or the resulting segwit2x, but instead they were largely trying to merely change BTC governance to make it easier to change bitcoin however the fuck might be desired in the future (a desire to demote devs and promote miners - but probably really trying to get then BIG money and exchanges to have more say than normies plebs) .. framing it as majority rule and other baloney stuff like that.

Edit:  Made some clarification edits to the last paragraphs/segment around the time of AlcoHoDL's below response.. whoops.

I am having some difficulties with your presumption that 200-300 BTC are needed when entry-level fuck you status is at about 89 BTC currently, and likely to continue to go down.. even though right now does not seem to be the greatest time to be shaving off BTC profits..

By the way, entry-level fuck you status is considered equivalent of $2 million and does presume an ability to passively withdraw at least 4% per year, which would be $6,666 per month - which would not be a bad income in a lot of places in the world.. even for two peeps.

I do understand and appreciate that giving up pensions of two people is a pretty BIG thing to be giving up.. but your number 200 to 300 BTC still seems a bit large - and don't get me wrong, I think that it is a pretty BIG ass deal to go down the road of giving up that kind of income (even though you did not state the amount(s) - and don't really want that information either). 

I suppose one of my concerns is that you framing the escape from USA situation (not that I am advising it) as a kind of unthinkable absent having some ungodly amount of BTC when 89BTC and maybe even quite lower quantities of BTC will be more than reasonable to have entry-level or even higher than entry-level fuck you status and beyond.

Let's just say that I did not get reckt too badly in this latest leveraging liquidation of the past several weeks, and I was still able to hold onto my greater than 0.63BTC, then how much greater than 0.63BTC would I need to get before it triggered a "separation" threshold concern? 

Within your guidelines, if I were to get up to 0.7 BTC, then that would cause me to end up with wallets around 0.35BTC each.. of course, not the same exact amounts in each wallet, necessarily..

I am pretty sure that if I play my cards right, I should be able to get over 0.7BTC.. but these are scary times.

By the way... fuck off in regards to your name-dropping "Coinbase".. not that you intended to do it (so don't be taking my colorful language too personally like some peeps seem to do, not going to mention the name of bloody mary, because who wants bloody mary showing up merely because it was mentioned three times in a row while looking in a mirror with three screaming school girls)..   I know Jbreher used to name drop Coinbase a lot, and probably just to get little digs in here and there.. not that jbreher is particularly mean.. but he was kind of against going along with certain things, including our use of Stamp as our thread price reference.

In recent times, I have been telling newbies to start out with https://www.swanbitcoin.com/  and they allow you to buy through their cite and also to transfer your coins off of their cite, but they do not have any way to sell BTC through their cite, so a bit of a quandary in terms of one-stop shopping for beginners.

What about the other half?

Asking for a friend.

I don't disagree with your various points, but at the same time, I will caution you in terms of attempting to overly explain bitcoin in terms of what might be going on with whales and their successes and failures in the short to medium term BTC price movements.  

Bitcoin remains amongst the free-est of modern markets with decently growing liquidity that is trying to be tamed and controlled by some pretty big players, and just like in the past, there have been some times that some pretty BIG-ASS players have gotten their asses handed to them, and we are also seeing some of that with our current negative BTC price moves, and surely not all of the wreckage is directly attributable to bitcoin, but some of the players who are likely going to zero and/or going to zero were BIG players (or potentially BIG players) who likely bit off more than they could chew, and sure they are contributing to some pretty large decent short-term BTC negative price pressures, and some BTC HODLers and even new folks to BTC will play this period in time in a way that they are financially benefitted and become more powerful through their actions in this period, and others may well not get involved or might even play this time period badly in terms of their expectations of what to do next, and perhaps even preparing for ONLY one BTC price direction - which might not work out well for them.

Besides BTC price momentum, there are other decently informative BTC price models that attempt outline broader trends about what is going on in bitcoin, so downgrading or denigrating those models may well work to the peril of those who are failing to account for such information points contained within the BTC price prediction models, which includes but not limited to 1) Stock to flow, 2) four year fractal and 3) exponential s-curve adoption based on network effects and Metcalfe principles.  yeah, currently a lot of people believe that such models are dead, and those peeps might not end up having a good time, if they fail/refuse to appreciate the importance of such information contained therein.


Fair enough.

I am biting my nails with a kind of anticipation.

I agree with everything that you are saying Mr.right85 - except your belief that there is a rule about not borrowing to invest.  Historically, lots of folks get rich as fuck by borrowing to invest and also have been able to enjoy life much more because of their being able to front load investment and/or consumption.

Of course, the whole fucking debt system has both gotten out of hand, and has shown a lot of its flaws and inequities in recent times... but we do not necessarily need to get into system-wide issues regarding the many ways that the debt system is flawed in order to also understand that in an individual level there can be a lot of ways to employ debt wisely and also to put yourself in a much better place than you would have been able to do without the employment of debt.

I will point out that you have already implied the answer to the question that you posed in terms of how normies may get fucked by debt by either not having a plan B and/or by overdoing it (using debt to gamble in excessive ways).  I doubt that I really need to go into details on these points in order that any of us might be able to appreciate examples of good use of debt and bad use of debt and even appreciate the difference between reasonable kinds of gambling and/or investing  and unreasonable/excessive kinds of gambling and/or believing that you are investing when you are not.


Don't get me wrong, there may well be some cases that are ambiguous and fall in the middle and they may or may end up working out.. perhaps based on good luck or bad luck.. and sometimes mistakes are made too.  Sometimes a guy might engage in some risky gambling efforts to bet 8x than the BTC price is going to go up, but then accidentally bet 80x, and frequently that bet will cause him to get reckt, but every once in a while, he ended up getting lucky when the mistake paid off because he recognized the mistake after it had already caused unexpectedly larger profits than had been expected.


What's it mean?

hahahaha

Do you know the expression:  "parts is parts"?

 

Actually, I should not leave any curious cats hanging in terms of the actual reference in this one, because it is quite humorous, even though the substantive claims of the commercial are factually wrong and the overall commercial is attempting to sell process/fast foods as if processed food were real food.. but anyhow click on the link to experience 30 seconds of humor without necessarily buying into the commercial aspect of it that ended up being a lie.. but at the same time did have commercial success in terms of causing folks to match the expression "parts is parts" with a certain fast food chain.


Regarding your overall post D_W.. Wow.. lots of good points/"parts"..  

I doubt that any of us can keep up with so many things, and so surely sometimes there can be value in threads like this one, in which we are able to see some information that might be out there and attempt to explore it more thoroughly when we see that there has been work in that direction, yet at the same time, we might not have known where to start or even how the questions might be framed... .. So your post seems to frame the issues in an understandable way... even though there are still some folks who are not going to really understand the importance of such information.. and these things take a while to get into the consciousness of normie peeps in the population.


I am a little bit surprised that you did not put governments into your above list.  Don't get me wrong, I am not anti-government because sometimes governments do have reasons to get involved in compiling information generally and sometimes they also have legitimate reasons to get into specifics and including some personal information matters, and sometimes their getting involved in compiling, composing and even snooping on citizens does have some legitimate public interest purposes.. but at the same time, we have seen that some of the governmental departments have become abusive with their access to some of the various kinds of private information.. and for sure, these are ever evolving lines in terms of how the internet contributes to a lot of free flow of information and disinformation too.. but then sometimes governments are not even always playing fairly with their attempts to engage in oversight or maybe even refrain from employing their own disinformation tactics..

and since we may well have realized that bitcoin is the money of the internet, bitcoin has provided with quite a few ways that monetary value can be literally attached to the transmission of information, so a whole new layer of complexity comes into play in regards to what lines might be being crossed if governments are prying into financial information that they might not have previously had access and for sure we cannot be presuming that they have any kind of inherent right to see the information and we cannot even presume that some of the legal precedent is correct in terms of some areas that they have historically had access or have not have had access. it remains quite murky, currently contentious in some circles and ongoingly with aspects of explosive potentialities.

There are a lot of us who recognize that in several ways bitcoin has been engaging in various kinds of implementation aspirations and even practices to attempt to mimics aspects of physical cash transactions and some of the privacy that can be present through physical cash transactions.. but of course, the transmissibility of bitcoin causes it to raise some potentially legitimate public interest concerns for whether the same levels of privacy might still be permissible within an instrument (such as bitcoin) in which it is so easy to transmit to anywhere in the world and to anyone without preemptively stopping it... but perhaps post hoc being able to look at it in the event that there might be some ways in which some of that remains traceable.. which quite a bit still is open in bitcoin but there have always been ways to make various aspects of transactions private, while even very sophisticated persons will still sometimes fuck up and cause leaks in their transactions, which surely remains in the public interest if crimes might have been committed.


Actually, that might be another good point that you are making D_W, and I would not characterize it as "sad" but instead a demonstration that there are a lot of folks who have hardly any clue and it is not necessarily a bad thing that they are engaged in some blissful renditions to describe what they believe is going on, and the same is true that sometimes we wished that the lawmakers were to know what they are talking about a wee bit MOAR better, and when they come out with such outrageously dumb talking points that conclude the opposite of the truth, such as proclaiming that bitcoin is not ESG-friendly, then sometimes we might want to breath some sighs of relief that anything that any of those kinds of lawmakers attempt to implement is going to cause them to get reckt in one way or another, even if it is just the downfall of their reputation showing that they don't know shit. .and they might even get memified into considerable public ridicule for how dumb they are...  

Quite a bit of the ESG and green movement discussions seem to be going down that path... not that they might not have some short-term traction in some jurisdictions and cause miner migration to more friendly jurisdictions and in the meantime, tick tock next block whether bitcoin has 1m miners or 10k miners, the difficulty is going to adjust . and yes there may well be some attempts to attack, but the attacker is going to have to build the fuck out of their mining fleet in order to engage in such mining attacks, and sure some of us (even yours truly) considered the possibility that the 2021 China miner drama could have some possibilities for government level attacks on bitcoin and its mining, and even if there might have been some preparations in that direction to make such an attack, it seems that bitcoin (and miners) learned from that, which seems to have made bitcoin stronger. and sure, never say never about various attacks that could be made or that are in the works of being set up, but bitcoin remains a pretty decent formidable and moving target that is not 100% invulnerable, but still I continue to believe that anyone who is a no coiner or a low coiner better get the fuck off of zero, and now is just as good as any other time, if not even better than it was 8 months ago.

I hate to say that you might be right.. you party poop...


But, I also hate to be spreading overly optimistic cheer when it is not warranted, and for sure, I probably should be updating my downity prediction percentages (since I had last updated them on May 19 - when BTC prices were around $27k), but I really do not like thinking about downity in terms of a lot of details even though I still retain some ideas in my head.. I might just not want to get into those scenarios very much - I am not going to admit to being in denial of the possibility of down or even a lower low as you frame it that's for sure, because I have various specific and ballpark preparations that continue to including buying more if the BTC price goes down and maybe even resorting to HODL, too... or maybe DCA... living various aspects of life and maybe figuring out whether or not certain expenses might need to get cut.. so rather than five hookers, lambos and blow to hunker down to ONLY two... things like that to make it through these admittedly tougher times.

So yeah right now our lowest low of this cycle remains at $17,953.. so it may well not hurt to plug in some downity predictions at some point.. I am not feeling like doing it, yet.. I hate to even talk about where my various buy orders are at currently (even though they are there.. just not in the mood to discuss at this time.. you fuckers.. (not referring to anyone in particular)).

And gosh, holy shit LFC.. I hope it does not take 2 years for many of us BTC HODLers to feel better.. If we keep up various decent practices of prudence in our BTC management practices, whether we consider our lil selfies in the accumulation, maintenance or liquidation phase of our BTC investment, I am hoping that it should not take 2 years to start feeling MOAR better... Yeah, if we engaged in considerable fuck ups including over-leveraging or other risky plays that caused us to lose significant portions of our BTC (let's say more than 10%-ish), then it could take 2 years or longer for those guys to start feeling MOAR better.. and they may well never get back to even close to where they were.. variations in the form of getting reckt... anyhow, maybe I am just quibbling with how any of the more prudent/reasonable folks (I am including my lil selfie here) are going to need to have such high expectations that we have to get back to $50k or whatever before we start feeling MOAR better.... I don't really want to quibble too much but I don't really have to have BTC get back to ATHs or even $50k before I feel good, and I would anticipate that having some prudence and reasonableness in practices and expectations, there are a whole hell of a lot of ways to profit from BTC and continue to profit from BTC, especially for anyone who has longer time frames - even if some (even prudent) folks are currently under water - perhaps folks who have been in bitcoin for less than 2 years may well be underwater currently, yet I am still going to argue that any folks who got in less than 2 years and happen to be underwater are still likely not even in a bad place so long as continuing to employ whatever means of combinations of DCA, buy on dips and/or HODL...

Of course, your milage may vary (especially for you guys under water)..and even though I had spent a couple of years underwater (LFC, too I believe), even though I sometimes felt some tensions about being under water, I also felt a bit of pleasure on those occasions when I got some extra cashflow (or DCA abilities) to have the fortune to be able to buy BTC and to realize every single purchase that I was making at that time was causing my total average cost per BTC to get pulled to a lower cost per BTC.

By the way, I cannot help myself from continuing to type.. fuckk..

The guys in their liquidation phase or close to being in their liquidation phase of their BTC investment are likely most fucked in terms of whatever dilemmas that they might be feeling, currently... no one wants to be selling at these kinds of prices.. so probably the best that those in their liquidation phases can attempt to do is to just attempt to be somewhat modest in the amounts of their sales.. and to figure out if they are able to hold on for whatever period of down in the short term might still exist.. or flat.. or even little spikes up.. and sure there are always chances of a v bottom and total recking of various shorts.. and the reality of the matter is that those are minority likelihoods that probably should not be banked on.. even though they sometimes do happen from time to time.. and April 2019 until June 2019 was one of those.. but they are surely not assured, even though they can happen.. so the dilemma of those in or close to liquidation phases is if they had already cashed some out at higher prices then they may well be sitting o.k... but if they haven't they have to make various assessments about what to do too in terms of making through our current period of seeming bottom that could go lower or might not.


If you are a low coiner or no coiner, and you are positive about bitcoin, then surely you can appreciate these kinds of times to accumulate, but if you have a lot of BTC and you might not have cashed out as much as you should have, then you may well be more panicked and nervous.. and moreso if you might have engaged in some leveraging of your stash.. 


There may be some people who fucked up in their assessments in terms of their own financial management (how much to keep in cash versus BTC) and/or their risk management (where to store your BTC and if you want to get a dividend on your BTC).

Maybe I should give an example?

I know a person who does not really seem to understand BTC very well, and kind of just goes along with the NGU technology and surely was expecting $100k by the end of 2021, and maybe even to have some of those high prices to linger into 2022.. but each year this person is supposed to be selling a portion of BTC to be able to live and to cover some expenses (projects etc - even living a higher life style than what had been available prior to getting into BTC several years earlier). 

Around early April I recall having a discussion with such person when the BTC prices were around $47k, and there had been no cashing out of any BTC yet, and there were potentially a lot of bills coming in June/July/August due to ongoing and anticipated construction costs and some other stuff. I expressed some concerns that nothing had been cashed out, and I anticipate that there were ongoing thoughts that the BTC price was going to go up rather than down, and they would be o.k. with flat too, but we neither got up and we also did not get flat, so then we are faced with DOWN, and I also learned that the same person had been getting income from one of the entities that had connections with the various scam projects that either went belly up or are in various states or insolvency..

The person seems to be in a situation of a forced seller, because coins are drying up. and the bills are coming in... and the person failed/refused to be more prudent.  By the way, I knew about that persons involvement in one of those interest bearing accounts for more than 3 years because that person had tried to give me a reference code and was doing that to entice other newbies into bitcoin. and there was nothing scandalous about it, it was merely based on good intentions to get others involved into bitcoin and to earn an interest rate too... Several times, I mentioned that bitcoin is designed to pump forever, so you should not be putting your money into those kinds of products, so my point is that even people with good intentions get into those kinds of illiquid products and then their overall funds and funds available dry up. Even if the person might have had 15 BTC and they only had 2 or 3 BTC in such product, 2-3 BTC is still a lot of BTC for their own financial circumstances to potentially lose or to just have locked up...and people can be stubborn, even when they don't really know, they are willing to take risks, even if they are not bad people or anything.. and they might even have a lot of common sense, but they still get into a kind of pickle situation with both their maintenance of cash versus bitcoin and their desire to earn on their BTC that they hold based on merely wanting to earn 3% or whatever.

If I properly understand what you are saying, that is not a bad point - not that we need to compete with each other in terms of "which one of us gets richer" because from my point of view, I think that one of the major points continues to be the extent to which anyone of us is able to apply his/her BTC strategies in such a way that complements his/her own individual circumstances, which might not necessarily result in higher performance down the road in regards to one indicator (how much richie did I get, for example) but instead just providing a certain level of comfort regarding risk management and being able to sleep better at night, even if the end result may well not be doing whatever it takes to get more richie. 

Surely, we see that some times, guys engage in gambling techniques because their goals are to end the day being more richie than their neighbor or some random person on the interwebs (or being able to say "I told you so"), and those do seem like shallow goals even though we likely do need to admit that a lot of us (not even excluding yours truly here) may well have tendencies to engage in these kinds of potentially shallow competitive comparisons.

It is not necessarily even bad to make comparisons, and I have found it to sometimes be beneficial to suggest that someone's investing into BTC technique seems to NOT even be beating a reasonable/prudent DCA strategy, so maybe it is not fair of me to do that, but many of us have come to realize that DCA can be carried out in a way that allows it to serve as a decently low stress technique to ongoingly invest into BTC without so much getting caught up in the day to day or getting caught up in the fairly violent price swings that can take years (even up to 4 years or longer (we have seen in recent times) to play themselves out).   

So, perhaps it is somewhat cruel of me and maybe even somewhat insensitive to criticize folks for underperforming a reasonable/prudent long term DCA strategy, and I find it somewhat irrelevant if they have outperformed a reasonable/prudent long term DCA strategy - even if that could be icing on the cake and or attributable to either skill, luck or both, and it can be very difficult to really have any kinds of knowledge regarding whether their ability to outperform a reasonable/prudent long term DCA strategy is replicable.

From my point of view, sometimes there can be some fruitfulness in making comparisons - so long as we are attempting to minimize the injection of ego into the competition, and surely its not easy to keep our egos in check - especially if we happen to be a human (not naming any names here - nor trying to subtly insert my lil selfie into such club)

I have a hard time believing that anyone who holds/controls large sums of bitcoin are going to keep it in places that can be identified as being owned by one person or entity (unless they are a public company or a government that has to make those kinds of disclosures).  Private individuals or even private institutions should be disincentivized in being known for controlling large amounts of bitcoin.  So even with something like 130k BTC, there might be some preferences to not keep more than a certain amount in any one place.. maybe with a person or an entity with something like 130k BTC, something less than 10k in any one location?  Sure, there might be some folks who want to keep it all in one location, but that surely seems risky for a variety of reasons...

By the way, I could understand/appreciate that if there is a private trust or some kind of a joint ownership, then there might be some need to create some traceability regarding sources, so the other joint owners know about fairness and accountability.. so maybe i am arguing against myself to consider that there could be some cases in which accountability or tracking of ownership is preferred.  Oh, as I am typing I just considered another case of inheritance, so a private individual or private entity might want to show ownership so that if anything ever happened, then the heirs (or the beneficiaries) will know how much BTC is out there and the various locations to find the BTC.  

Anyhow, I am having some difficulties appreciating very many situations in which there would be incentives to have very large amounts of wealth to be traceable to private entities.  I speculate that many of the BIGGEST of the bitcoiners are going to exercise a sufficient amount of camouflaging of their coins, and sure they might disclose to a few others, but not really allow for situations (like holding al the coins in one place) to be part of their regular or best practices.. so maybe my conclusion is that the 130k BTC may well be of some kind of public or quasi-public entity but the author of the article just does not know and might even be fishing for crowd sourcing.. which we are helping when we speculate in connection with such article..

Edit:  D_W made similar points (with examples) in his earlier post, too.

It seems to me that this thread does spark an ability to talk about quite a variety of topics, and surely we do not really seem to be completely limited to the scenario that The Pharmacist set forth and his preferences, even though it does seem good to attempt to apply some of his framework or at least acknowledge how some of us might be diverging from what he had bee suggesting to be goals. 

It does also seem to me that when guys are getting into talking about what it might be like to vacation in an area, there should be some attempts to recognize the various ways that vacationing differ from attempts to stay somewhere longer term 3-6 months or even for longer periods.  Many countries do not really allow easy access for period even exceeding a few months outside of being classified as a tourist or merely being able to continue to extend the tourist visa (whether that requires exiting and re-entrance or being able extend without having to leave).

We have already seen members posting information in this thread that seems to show that they may well be able to consider the income from a signature campaign to be their full-time funds and even their full-time job.... On the one hand, we know that most signature campaigns are not going to require more than a few hours a day or even maybe 8 hours per week at most to meet their posting requirements - even if some members might have to struggle with composing acceptable content.  And, we also know that any one signature campaign is going to have uncertainty in how long it will last, but it seems that the forum practice of allowing signature campaigns will continue to allow some expectation that there will be an ability to continue to earn money through a signature campaign.. so there might be some ability to rely on the continuation to some degree.

Of course, those of us with a variety of income earning options or even those of us who have already stacked away value that we are able to live off of into the future (aka built an investment portfolio) are going to realize that it tends to NOT be very prudent to rely ONLY on one source of income (or one kind of income like signature campaigns), while at the same time, it can be difficult to judge the circumstances of others without really knowing what kinds of job opportunities might be available to them based on their skills and abilities too...

Personally I have tried to suggest that guys (and gals) should be striving to earn money while they can (while they are younger and while they are able) because many times, we are not going to want to be forced to work when we get older.. so if we want to work when we get older then it is more of an option rather than a necessity.  If signature campaigns are a guy's (or gal's) only income, then it is likely going to be difficult to also save within that amount of income in order to build an investment portfolio in order to have money when older.. so it should just continue to be a consideration for anyone who is ONLY relying on the income of a signature campaign to live and to save whether that approach is aggressive enough in order to really be able to build some kind of a reserve nest egg (ie sufficiently substantial investment portfolio)..

oh and the same is true with younger guys who might be running around the world or going various places and only considering consumption without savings, they may end up having a lot of fun, but if they have not build some kind of sufficiently substantial investment portfolio, then they may well have ended up squandering away opportunities that were only  available in their younger years because later on they are not going to be able to make as much money if they have not built skills and experience to garner higher wages - and they might no longer be able to perform some of the manual labor that they thought that they would be capable of doing when older.

Not that I give too many shits about what various WO members think... but maybe we should run a poll about whether I should respond to you.. or just let you have the last word.. at the moment..

If Infofront conducted the poll, then the answers would be anonymous..   I doubt very many would want me to respond..especially if they could answer anonymously. .perhaps fewer than 2 out of 50 (but that would still be 4%.. maybe if all your sock puppets were to participate that might get us over 12%, perhaps?)

If I did respond, there would be ONLY a few points that I would probably respond to... I have already pretty much responded to most ideas contained therein at least a few times.. and yeah.. I don't really know if I might end up responding to more than just 2 or 3 points until after I start to draft my response.

Edited June 26, 2022:  Added response to two tadamichi posts


Some of them are easier to grasp than others, and sometimes there can be some advantages in taking a microscope to anyone of them - even though it might not be necessary just to get started.  It's not good to let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

Hypothetically, let's say that this hypothetical person named Oliver just heard about bitcoin, and he concludes that it appears to be a pretty good investment just to get started and to maybe study the matter over the next couple of years and then decide if he wants to stay in bitcoin or not.  Oliver has a bit of an idea about himself, and he scribbles on a napkin and figures out that he already has an investment portfolio of about $50k, and he has about $8k in cash that he could invest in anything that he wants, and he has about $1k to $2k per month of extra cashflow coming in (extra means after his expenses.. and it is $1k to $2k because he knows that it varies, but he has not really sat down and plotted it out).  

Oliver is not really sure if he wants to make any lump sum investment into bitcoin yet, so he decides to invest $20 per week, and then reassess after a few months and maybe if he has time, he can dedicate some time to figuring out how he feels about bitcoin as compared to some of his other investments and also to project out some of his cash flows and look at his other investments, what he tends to spend his money on, and just how he feels about some of the details related to the various other investments that he has - because he has not really thought about some of those kinds of details very much.. even though he generally pays attention to live within his means so that he does not spend more than he makes.
 
Let's say Oliver is about 28 years old and has done various kinds of work and has some education, but has not really thought about his finances in any kind of detailed way (such as within the above areas), so in each area, he can delve into further detail and even study each of the areas while he is continue to buy $20 per week worth of bitcoin.  The more he studies and figures out each of the areas, the more he can potentially be deliberate about how he is investing and comparing different kinds of investments that he might have already made...he can think about what ishis timeline and why?  What would he like to attempt to accomplish at various points in his life (sure including financial angles).   His thinking about the matters in detail might not help him to learn as well as if he puts some various practices into effect that might cause some back and forth learning more about some of the skills that he has, details about himself and then making adjustments based on what he learns about himself (and also learning about the subject matter and various ways that planning and projecting forward could lead to different results).  Frequently we can learn more by putting our ideas into practice than merely thinking about them without taking any concrete actions.


I think that the experiences help to make the learning sink in better and even make people more curious about learning when they are actively interacting..


Sometimes you don't really know what you don't know until after you learn it, but that does not necessarily mean you need to try to learn everything.  There could be some focus, such as:  I am going to learn about this area now.. and then spend quite a bit of time learning about that area even though some areas may overlap, and then sometimes you might decide to get involved in a certain kind of work or hobby in order to develop a kind of skill... It could be reading, writing, math or even public speaking, but there may be a lack of interest to just sit down and read books on the topic of math.. but then if you prepare some charts or go through your finances to project your cashflow then you may spend quite a bit of time employing math while you are engaged in those other projects that are of interest to you.  Sure sometimes you can just get Excel to do the math for you, and there's no problem with that, but sometimes if you arrange the data in differing kinds of ways, you can try to figure out what would be the correct formula that you need to put in order to get the results that you would like to have displayed, and that's more interesting than just pure math (even though it may well include math in order to really figure out what you want to display in terms of your own information in your life).


If you set up various systems and you try to follow them, the extreme BTC price moves (or even not extreme) can sometimes help to show you what is your risk tolerance and also your abilities to not get emotional in regards to your responses to whatever might be happening.  Sometimes if you project various possible outcomes, you can attempt to measure if you are more attached to one outcome versus another outcome, and even consider h0w you might feel under certain scenarios and even adjust your own expectations in more realistic ways, as I tried to do in the chart outlining my expectations about price movements and the timeline for getting there.  It may not matter so much about whether you are more correct than not, but just to be able to recognize and appreciate that when you really attempt to grapple with how likely you believe one outcome or another to be, almost never are you going to arrive at 100% for a future result, and even if you look at the past, you might realize that you might not even be able to proclaim with 100% certainty with what caused x to happen, even though you can see that x did happen, so sometimes how certain we can be in regards to where we are at, how we got here and/or where we are going will partly have to do with how we frame the questions and present the information that we are striving to describe (whether we are ONLY trying to figure out that information or projections for ourselves or we might be trying to describe for others).

Your example of BTC price movement is a good one because there have been several occasions that I set my plans for the BTC price to go up or down, and then I planned what I would do at each increment that the BTC price went up, but when the BTC price went up faster than I expected, I largely ended up doing something close to the opposite of what I had already told myself to do, so in order for me to better learn about myself (and my emotions) from that experience, I had to go through with something like that and to actually have a system in place that I was attempting to follow in order to recognize and appreciate how I ended up reacting and to attempt to figure out whether I needed to fix my system or whether I needed to fix myself (and sometimes there is a little bit of fixing and tweaking of both going on in which tweaks can be made to both in order to cause more comfort.. but still might not result in total lack of emotions when something similar ends up happening again in the future, but there might have developed better ways to deal with similar situations and to be better prepared oneself psychologically and financially for those kinds of situations (and even extreme situations that could happen).


For sure, i know what you say is true.  We might lock in our plans about what to do for 5-10 years or more into the future, but sometimes short term happenings cause us to have to tweak what it is that we are doing and how we are going to get there.  Sometimes our goals change, but sometimes we might see that what we are doing is not getting us closer to our goals.. and I am not even saying that there are needs to be whimsical about it. because some of the longer term investments like bitcoin could have 3-5 going years of negative, but that might not mean that strategies would necessarily change in terms of buying $20 week or whatever the amount might be, but something positive or negative could happen in the interim that causes needs to adjust, and let's say that a certain job opportunity came up, and in the short term, it would cause a need to lower the $20 per week down to $10 per week, but down the road the amount would be be able to be raised to $100 per week.  There can be a variety of creative brainstorming about how to accomplish ongoing investment goals, but in the end, there could be a balancing of the trade offs that cause a tweak, and then might even cause another tweak because of some other further developments, including even getting a loan for a business or a real estate opportunity.. and maybe or maybe not  BTC funds are affected.  Those are choices within your discretion, and not everyone will balance out their preferences in the same way, and some BTC HODLers/Accumulators might have better results and some may have worse results based on the way they chose to allocate and to tweak their plans along the way.

Edited June 26, 2022:  Added the below part (response to two tadamichi posts)


For sure, there is a kind of balance that each of us do because when we don't know anything, then sometimes we cannot be sure about what we do not know, so for sure when we are younger, and even when we get into our teenage years, we are likely given more and more autonomy to make more and more important decisions for ourselves, and surely the stronger the skills and character that you have developed as a kid, then the more likely that you are going to be better at exercising good judgement in your teenage years - and for sure, there are likely to be transgressions too - and if we are looking at learning critical thinking skills, there are likely a lot of cultural differences both in terms of whether we learn critical thinking skills and maybe even if there might be healthy or not so healthy limits in regards to which areas in which we might be allowed to question. 

Sometimes also we might know what the words "critical thinking" means, but we may well have differing understandings about what that means in terms of trying to calculate who is telling the truth about what and is such "truths" based on facts and sound logic to reach reasonable conclusions and sometimes conclusions are absolute in terms of something like math and other times the conclusions might have some more leeway in terms of what values and beliefs make them true or kind of true or more likely to be true if applied for this group of people or in this situation.

There might be some ages that we are not even really capable of abstract thinking, and we can get better at various kinds of problem solving skills and surely some folks are better at these matters than others, and whether it is nature versus nurture, I am not completely sure even though I am pretty sure that we should be able to get better at developing our critical thinking skills and even recognizing that there are some areas in which we do not really know and we are relying on the expertise of others.  So, in that regard, sometimes we might give a lot of credence to some "experts" but as soon as we realize that they have loose connections with reality or sometimes they are lying or just getting facts or logic wrong, then we may well decide to give them less credibility or maybe give them credibility in some areas, but realize that they are not knowledgeable enough or they are lacking logic to be able to provide good information in regards to certain other topics. 

When we are a beginner at certain topics, we may well be able to learn from almost anyone as long as they are not providing us with bad information or teaching us bad habits, but as we get more advanced in that subject matter, we may well need more advanced teachers, and sometimes we may well not even be ready or able to learn the more advanced areas of some topics until we really build our basics first - and surely individuals have differing rates in which they are able to advance and some of that does have to do with their ability to focus or their interests, too.

Learning about the financial angles of bitcoin can be the same way.  Sure there may well be some needs to learn about some fundamental aspects of bitcoin just to kind of get some ideas about what it is and perhaps how it might be different than (and similar to) other technologies and relatedly how it might differ and be similar to some shitcoins, but then there is also the personal financial management angle, and surely none of us has to have all of our financial knowledge figured out before getting started or even to figure out the various ways to manage risk and to manage our psychology, so we can learn some of those skills and even learn by getting burnt, but if we are smart enough, we might be able to figure out the difference between which ares we are learning and maybe to employ less capital/value while we are learning and to perhaps be able to increase the amounts of value that we put at risk as we learn about ourselves and our finances. We also might learn how to develop certain kinds of ways of looking at financial information in different ways and being able to look at absolute amounts and/or look at percentages, and to figure out where we might attempt to learn more by looking at the same data in different kinds of ways and some of those different ways of looking at the information might be helpful for us to figure out ourselves and our intended strategies, and sometimes, we might figure out that we spun the information in a way that really was not helpful in our being able to understand the information better or to understand our own psychology or financial circumstances better.



I don't claim to understand all the different ways that leverage or margin trading or other various more sophisticated financial tools might be employed to hedge BTC bets in either direction, and the general approach that I attempt to preach to folks is to attempt to learn and employ more basic techniques first, and the fact that bitcoin appears to be one of the greatest asymmetric bets that we have ever seen in terms of fundamentals that is widely available to anyone in the world (sure some have easier access than others in terms of having the internet and having some basic knowledge of how bitcoin works), it does not seem to be necessary to employ risky practices in order to potentially become rich as fuck just by taking a somewhat modestly aggressive approach to bitcoin and just letting time work for you.  Of course, there are no guarantees either, but if you invest 4-10 years or longer, or even have an investment timeline of 20-30 years, you are likely going to be much better off to have been getting some kind of early stake in bitcoin and building on it.

No matter when you employ leverage, you are likely adding some front-side risk, but the leverage that you employ might still be prudent - especially if you do something more simple such as getting a loan for 2 years or 4 years, and you still can be advantaged by getting the loan as long as you have ways to pay the loan if the BTC price moves against the direction that you had expected.  Maybe an example might help?

Let's say for example when BTC prices were bouncing between $33k and $48k for most of the first 4 months of this year, you concluded that anywhere in that price range would likely be a good price point to buy BTC, so you were very bullish about bitcoin, but you did not necessarily feel good about your cashflow to be able to DCA into BTC, so instead of DCA'ing into bitcoin, you concluded that it would be a good time to front load into bitcoin instead of relying upon your cashflow to DCA for the next 2 years.

In late March and early April you investigated into the matter and you found out that you could get a loan for $10k that would have a 6% per year interests rate, and the total would be due at the end of 2 years, so if you calculate the whole matter out, and you decided to get the loan and to do a lump sum BTC investment at $40k which would get you 0.25 BTC in early April 2022.  You realize that the loan is costing you about $600 for the two years (making payments, the interest is added on on a monthly basis so it lowers through the period), so you figured that the odds were going to be pretty good that the BTC prices were going to be higher than $42.4k which would be your break even costs for the loan and the cost of the loan.  So surely, you have to make payments of about $441 per month in order to service the loan, but you still decide to take the chances and buy the BTC at $40k.

Well we see in the short-term BTC prices have gone down, so as long as you have enough money to service the loan, you have not engaged in an unreasonable bet (even if you ended up being wrong about whether you might have been able to buy cheaper at a later date). You are engaging in different kinds of leverage if you have to put up collateral including if you don't have enough collateral to cover if the BTC prices go below certain price points.  So there are ways to structure leverage in more reasonable and less risky ways, but there still is likely going to be some risk that you end up NOT being correct, and you would have been better off just DCA buying into the matter or waiting to buy on dips and a lot of ways in which various other combination of strategies might have played out better, but there are also scenarios in which the BTC price could have gone up and you ended up getting the BTC at the lowest price that they would ever be again and you made a calculation to front load your anticipated cashflow (and to pay loan servicing fees) to potentially profit from the BTC prices going up.

Of course, some folks are able to negotiate better loan terms than others in terms of cost of the loan and how it is paid, and maybe instead of paying both interest and principle, they might ONLY have to pay interest which makes the loan way less costly to service, but requires a lump sum payment at the end of the loan period.  There are trade offs and surely I am not against using leverage so long as it is reasonable and for sure individuals are going to measure reasonableness, risks and even cost vs benefits in differing ways in which some ways of calculating and looking at the matter are more likely to pay off than others - and sometimes it may well be not whether you ended up being correct or not, but just whether you employed a reasonable strategy that had good chances for a payoff without putting much if any of your actual principle at risk (actually some people do not mind putting their principle at risk, and I personally do not tend to work my financial strategies in that kind of a way, whether we are referring to bitcoin or other kinds of assets/investments that I have).


For sure, some strategies (or available options) are more risky than others, and sometimes if you want to get some better ideas about how to make the trade offs, you might try to employ some of those kinds of tools.  Of course, I recommend getting your basics down first, and then building an investment portfolio, but if you have built an investment portfolio that has reached a decent size, then you might take a small amount and practice with some of those different kinds of financial instruments, and surely some of them have minimums, and maybe you will go through some assessments and decide that some of them are too complicated for you, or the amount of a loan is 12% per year or 20% per year, and you cannot justify getting a loan at those amounts.  Oh, and some of the loans might have a lower rate, but they require you to pay the "service fee" that is based on the total interest up front rather than on a monthly basis, and if you are paying all of the interest up front, you are being deceived into paying a higher rate than if it were calculated each month at 1/12 of the annual rate.. and sure compounding can be daily or quarterly, so there are various ways of calculating interest rates and how they apply including sometimes the lender has rights to change the rates, so as long as you understand the terms, you can at least calculate if the cost of the loan that you are receiving is worth it.. and surely some folks can negotiate better loan terms, too.


Well let's go by your forum registration date and for calculation purposes attempt to make this matter easier, and hypothesize that you started buying BTC prior to registering on the forum, and hypothesize that you have been buying BTC for 1 year.

There are a lot of ways that you could have approached the matter, and I am not even really proclaiming that there is any exact correct way, except perhaps that each of us should attempt to figure out the various BTC accumulation methods that are available and to figure out which one we believe works best for us and our personal situation.

In terms of accumulation, you could have employed DCA, buying on dips and lump sum.  You could have also fucked around with trading too... which as I said, I do not recommend until you build up your stash first, but sometimes people come into bitcoin and already have a decent sized investment portfolio and they might even have trading experience so they might even default into a trading approach.

Of course, if someone invested BIG a year ago (even in the mid $30ks), they might get really nervous when the BTC price drops around 50% from their average cost per BTC, and if you came into BTC a year ago, but you really were not sure about it, so either you kind of waited around or you took a real whimpy approach, you may well get excited to see the BTC prices drop because you were not sure about whether to buy at those higher prices, but when they drop you might decide to employ a more aggressive BTC buying plan. Some other people might have had reservations about BTC, but then when the BTC price drops, they recognize it as a scary situation, and it causes them to stop buying.

I am not going to attempt to suggest that anyone should have any kind of mindset, and they are free to assess the situation in accordance with their own researching into the matter, and even if they want to believe mainstream media or listen to banking and government officials who tell you that everything is going to be fine and everything is going to go back to how it used to be, then that is their choice regarding whether to get into bitcoin and how much to buy.

At the same time, I have no problem suggesting to no coiners or low coiners to get the fuck off of zero, and as a starting point they should consider an investment into bitcoin in the range of 1% to 25% of their investment portfolio, and if they are whimpy and skeptical, then sure o.k whatever, invest towards the 1% area, and if they are more bullish about bitcoin, then gravitate towards the higher end of the range, but in the end, where they choose to target is their own choice, and don't blame me if it does not work out because how much you invest and whether you invest is up to you, but I still suggest to get to at least 1%, even if very skeptical, but ultimately it is their responsibility whether they even do it.  Another thing is that after looking into the BTC matter for a while, individual tailoring could cause some folks to be even more aggressive than my 25% recommendation, and I don't have any problem if people become even more aggressive if they believe that their circumstances warrant it, but surely we can imagine people who have a shorter time horizon (such as less than 4 years) and they need to be more liquid and who may well need to be way more conservative in terms of their investing in risky investments - but there still might be an aggressive amount that still might make sense in their circumstances. 


For sure, leverage is a more advanced technique and better to employ basics first and get comfortable with basics before getting into more advanced techniques.


hahahaha

I am glad that you did not take the strength of my response personally.  Ever since I have been into bitcoin, I have been reading and responding to gold shills, and for sure, I am not completely against gold, but surely gold has issues.

A very powerful aspect of bitcoin, is that any of us can take immediate possession, because we might not be sure about if our bitcoin might get taken away from us or blocked from our ability to withdraw it if we hold it with a third-party.  Of course, some people are still going to hold their bitcoin with third parties, and even contract away their rights to take possession of their bitcoin, but I also believe with the passage of time, there is going to be some raised consciousness about some of the power that exists when having control over your own bitcoin keys, and we have seen examples where 3rd parties can become abusive - including the example of even BIG ass players, such as Russia, having their funds locked.. same would be true if their value was held in gold outside of their jurisdiction..

Not that any of us has $100 million to move around, but good luck moving $100 million in gold, but with bitcoin click click.. its done been moved and did not have to ask anyone or employ any guards or worry about an ice probe getting stuck up your butt to see if the gold happens to be there... can even deny having the bitcoin and it is more difficult to deny having that whole warehouse and what happens to be in it?  whoops.. shit they found it. 

Was not easy to keep prying eyes from noticing the existence of a whole warehouse... and I am not going to presume that anyone needs to know how many bitcoin that I might happen to have, even if it is ONLY 0.0063 BTC, or 0.063 BTC, or 0.63 BTC or it might happen to be 6.3 BTC, or maybe 630 BTC or perhaps 6,300 BTC or some other amount. or even none. l am not going to presume anyone needs to know except me, and maybe some other peeps that I choose to tell.. and do I have a warehouse that needs to be maintained for that? nope.  Does the quantity need to be held by someone? nope.. Are there are a variety of ways that it could be held and some ways are more flexible than others?  yep... hopefully some of the ways that BTC can be held will get easier and more user-friendly.. but there are already quite a few easy and user-friendly ways... and various trade-offs too.


I am glad that you feel that you are in a good place on a personal level.  For sure, there is a lot of power in having a decently long timeline for your BTC investment, and surely not everyone has the luxury of having a long timeline, so each of us should attempt to appreciate that the BTC investment circumstances of other peeps is not the same as our own and some folks may have gotten themselves into their own pickle or even sometimes they might not even be to blame for where they are at because they might have had employed reasonable and prudent risk management and still gotten into a pickle, somehow... , and of course, you should be attempting to set up your own BTC investment circumstances in such a way that you are not getting stressed out about them, even if matters (such as BTC price performance) might be going contrary to your preferences and expectations.


Yes.. that makes a lot of sense.. and I agree.  The money system is so fucking unfair, and sometimes it can really piss some of us off when we consider how normal people are getting screwed and for sure some people are getting screwed worse than others out of no fault of their own.. and yeah bitcoin could provide some recourse - and in that sense, some people might not even be able to invest into bitcoin $10 per week because they are so screwed in their normal circumstances, they have no access to credit or banking.,. but it still may well allow them to be better off if they are able to scramble up some amount of money and be able to put into bitcoin for 4-10 years or longer. even if only $10 per month... and of course, some people have more difficult access to being able to even feel that they could create a 4-10 year investment or longer and not have to break into it, which is probably not a good idea, but some people have very shitty circumstances even when they may well be trying to do everything in reasonable and practical ways.. but yeah, the incentive to gamble and take risks might naturally flow from having shitty odds when otherwise trying to fit into normal ways of earning and saving money.



Ok.. I had not realized that you were making that point.  Yes.  I agree that the rest of the bitcoin HODLers benefit from lost coins/lost keys.


I think only the HODLers benefit, and it can take a while to know that the lower supply is causing the value of everyone else's coins to go up.. it's a bit subtle but only provides value to HODLers in proportion to their BTC holdings, but would make coins more expensive to NO coiners.. and maybe in difficult to measure ways  because if I were to have 2.1 BTC, then I lost the keys, even though it seems like a lot of coins to me, it would only cause the BTC supply level to go down by 0.0001%, and of course, if access to 2,100 BTC had been lost, then the total supply level would go down by 1,000x more, which would be 0.01%... but I still doubt that it is any great thing to advocate that people lose their BTC, even though we realize that over time, it is likely that quite a large number of BTC will likely end up getting lost forever.. so probably there are more than 4.2 million coins already lost which is 20% of the total coins that would ever come into existence... and we likely realize that the longer that bitcoin exists, the more importance that people will place on trying to preserve their coins or to pass them down, but I have heard of quite a few folks who do not really have good/solid successor plans for their BTC..


Fair enough.


And, I believe that is why we can proclaim that we have a certain level of confidence that we are in the early stages of the largest wealth transfer in history, and a very large number of people either do not realize it, or they believe that bitcoiners are living in a fantasyland in regard to those kinds of claims.  Whether true or not, it would likely not be a bad thing for nocoiners to get some kind of stake in bitcoin, just in case the bitcoiners might be right.. and actually a lot of the no coiners remain resistant to getting onboard to bitcoin because they falsely believe that they are only feeding into a ponzi scheme and that they are not going to personally benefit from buying bitcoin.. so blah blah blah. they are overly priced and they end up being dumb fucks because they fail/refuse to act and fail to get the fuck off of zero.. and sorry to denigrate no coiners and low coiners because they are likely being completely reasonable based on their own lack of knowledge and fears of the unknown and suspicions of folks trying to scam them. yet even if they are completely reasonable. .they are only screwing themselves by not getting started (get off zero) sooner rather than later.


Thanks.. yes. it is good to have some back and forth, and sometimes I still wonder how helpful it is for me to repeat some of the ideas.. .and I suppose that was part of the reason that I created this thread.. but at the same time, I was striving to put the main ideas into the first 5 posts of the thread - even though sometimes I have to go back and flesh out some of the ideas in a better way, too.. and some of the ideas related to price do tend to have lacking of evergreen-ness.

Edited June 26, 2022:  Added response to two tadamichi posts

That's the spirit ImThour.   


Seems self-explanatory to me...   By the way, at first I edited all of that out, but then I realized that it might be more difficult to follow some of the points of your emphasis.. and also I do admit that I have a lot of typos in there. .but I blame my computer for that.. In recent times, I have had some lag that contributes to more mistakes than usual.. and I just choose not to go back and correct.. but I am now seeing that there are more typos than I had realized... whoops.  Hopefully I did not misstate any thing.. to the extent that any of it matters, anyhow.. .


I think that the post speaks for itself.. no reason for me to explain it.. it is sufficiently balanced, too.


I already explained various categories in which folks might contest what you are saying and it does not hinge on any lying explanation. .that is only part of what is being said.. and there are are also necessary and relevance considerations that are part of the way that I juxtaposed several ideas to attempt to outline the matter regarding why some folks could become hostile to some of your claims.. whether true or not.


My line is not fine at all.  You are taking the matter personally, so you believe that there is some kind of transgression going on when there is not.

You seem emotionally incapable of reading the message and instead you attribute emotions and irrationality to me, when all I did was attempt to explain why you might be getting kick back when you continue to raise poor me claims.. and that kind of stuff, whether true or not.


It is likely irrelevant whether it is true or not.. because the various points that I made do not hinge upon the truth of the matter asserted... as I already explained within the part you proclaim to have been an outburst.. and it was not.  Your characterization of bizzare is strange too.. because if it were an outburst, then I suppose that it might have been bizzare, but it was not even an outburst.. so makes it harder to proclaim it as bizzare because it was an explanation that you should have been able to consider (whether you agree with it or not) for the contents expressed therein, but instead, you are not even appearing to attempt to consider the contents, but instead taking the matter in an emotional way.. to the extent that is even warranted.

Maybe you are just providing more evidence to prove my point?  If you are getting emotional about matters on the internet (whether posted by you or someone else) then that is likely your problem.. especially since it really seems that you are getting emotional about information that you chose to post.. which is likely either not necessary and not relevant or both.  What is the purpose of posting such information that you are so emotional about?  Maybe the burden is on you to provide evidence of relevance and necessity.. rather than even assuming that part..


I doubt it.  I am proclaiming that it is quite arguable that you are posting irrelevant and unnecessary information, so how could that be defamatory?  You continue to insist on it, so it seems to me that you are causing your own issue..  I am not sure why you want to do that? I gotta feel bad for you in that regard.


You are choosing to read the situation like that, so it seems that you are getting emotional about some topic that you should not have repeatedly posted. 

Actually, it seems to me, that in the beginning, many of us, including yours truly did not say anything about whether what you were saying was true or not, so my point is that your ongoing and continued repetition of that point is having a wearing effect ... and quite likely not only on yours truly, and it seems to me that it does not even matter if it is true or not... because it should be quite clear that its relevance and/or necessity is quite questionable.. especially when it is repeated over and over.. which it seems that I have already sufficiently and adequately explained within the post that you project to have been an outburst when it is not even close to an outburst..

it be called an explanation.... and you don't even need to agree with it..


I said what I say.


I don't even feel like I am on the spot now..  I feel that I have already made my points.


I already know that.


I'm just responding on a public thread.  What would be my false accusation? You are saying that I called you a liar, but I did not because I have no way of establishing facts that are completely in your control and I do not even want evidence whether true or not because such information about your poverty status whether it exists or not is not necessary nor relevant.. especially once repeated 50 times.. maybe once or twice it is o.k. for context, but to expect that we have to believe you on something that is marginally relevant at best seems to problematic for your own emotional status and your choice to post about topics in which you have a lot of emotional attachment.. while at the same time expecting that people have to agree with you about the necessity, relevance and the truth.. which again... truth is not even very important in the whole scheme of things because it is becoming a BIG ASS distraction in regards to whatever point that you want to make with such information. .whether true or not..


Fair enough.. pink versus yellow shows the parts that are important to you and how you read them differently.. but even if you have wonderful analytical skills and you are able to parse a lot, you still seem to be failing/refusing to account for some of the overall points... and taking matters personally (and if I am attacking you), when they do not need to be taken in those kinds of ways.

At the same time, the level and intensity of your response does seem to further establish that you are getting too worked up about matters within your post, and surely I have difficulties knowing what I am supposed to do about that..   You believe the solution is that I should me nicer to you, and I doubt that is the correct conclusion.. and perhaps the opposite might be true... not that I intend on being mean for the mere sake of it.. and you accuse me of being mean or deliberately cruel and denigrating your character when I am not even trying to do that.  You are just reading the matters like that, and when you emphasize such points, you are likely creating those kinds of issues on your own..

I have no real reasons to deviate from any of the comments that I already made - except maybe correcting some typos.. but I don't feel right about correcting any typos when the post has already been cited (and even highlighted in various ways.. pink and yellow at that.. what more could a guy or gal ask for?)


At minimum, it seems like you are asking us to: 1) believe you about facts only in your possession, 2) feel sorry for you about such facts that are only in your possession and 3) agree that the repetition of such facts only in your possession is relevant and necessary


Nothing wrong with some of that, up to a point.


Oh gawd...      creating your own drama.


Are you talking about anyone in particular with such "venal" motives?


Is that a threat or no?

I still have some difficulties grasping why you are getting so worked up, and for the reasons that I already have stated, it seems that you are working yourself up and creating battles where none should exist.