Care to present this on a log chart?

Bad precedent to allow this sort of thing just because "this is Bitcoin." It harms Bitcoin's image.  Fiduciary responsibility for Bitcoin should be treated just as seriously as fiduciary responsibility for U.S. dollars.

Those entrusted with fiduciary responsibility have greater expectations of professionalism than anonymous internet forum posters.  The childish behavior of those who operate (own?) Bifinex, including the colorful language referring to a customer and the public disclosure of his account balance without permission, are very troubling.  Nothing Mat has done, or could ever do, would make these actions acceptable.

Bitfinex has a choice at this point.  They can either issue a formal apology and somehow make amends to Mat for the breach of fiduciary responsibility, or they can choose not to do so and lose all credibility.  Account balance disclosure is a serious breach of fiduciary responsibility; one that usually comes with legal ramifications.  Additionally, the one breach you see may point to countless others you do not.  Bitfinex should act now to restore confidence.

I'll sell you as many coins as you want for $0.25 each.  Let me know how many dimes you want.

What is your current Bitcoin position?  Long, Short, or Flat?

Now I see.  Trying to get market participants drunk so they fill with irrational exuberance.  By all means, continue!

It depends on where you look in the graph.  Sometimes prices leads adoption.  Sometimes adoption leads price.  In the center of the graph you can clearly see adoption heading up without price.  Eventually price follows up and rejoins adoption.  So there can be periods of divergence due to speculation.  But historically they always converge again.

Regarding the poll, define "current".  Current at what time/date?

You'd have to be really stupid not to hold for at least a year for lower capital gains taxes.

I have updated the graph with the latest data.  We continue to have higher lows on the Metcalfe data.  I have also added a zoomed chart to the first post.  We can clearly see we're working ourselves into a tighter and tighter range on adoption.  We should see a large price move upward when we break above the Metcalfe high of June 1st.

If it's a list of all those who sent emails for further information then why am I not on this list?  Granted I'd be upset to be publicly outed.  But I'm not there.  So I call shenanigans.  Damage control.  These are would-be bidders.

The rate of adoption is still increasing at an average linear rate over the past 2 years.  Price is still correlating with Metcalfe's value of number of unique addresses used per day, squared.  Thus, price can be expected to continue to increase at an exponential rate.  When the correlation with Metcalfe's value stops, or when adoption stops its linear increase, then you can expect price to stop increasing at an exponential rate.

Given the fact we expect adoption to move from linear to exponential as we near the center of the S curve, I only see Bitcoin price growth accelerating further from this point.  When we hit the center of the S curve, then we'll begin slowing down.

I think you are just playing at definitions and missing the larger point.  As rate of adoption increases beyond linear, rate of price appreciation will increase beyond the current exponential.  Until we pass the 50% point on the S curve, the rate of price appreciation should therefore accelerate, not diminish.

Without buyers near the top, we'd have no one to sell to.  I plan to keep no more than 90% of my liquid wealth in Bitcoin.  I will need to sell at regular price intervals to keep that ratio.

Right now adoption is increasing at a linear rate.  This means we gain more users at some average constant rate of new addresses per day.  The Metcalfe value is this value squared.  So, to approximate, N(y) = y^2, where N is the number of addresses and y the year number.  N increases exponentially as time marches on in a linear fashion.

As we approach the center of the S curve, adoption will begin increasing at an exponential rate.  The Metcalfe value is this exponential rate, squared.  So, to approximate, N(y) = (y^2)^2, where N is the number of addresses and y the year number.  This is simplified to N(y) = y^4.  N increases much faster here.

I will stop you here.  What you describe is not an S curve.  This is an S curve:

I *am* the OP.  The Metcalfe value displayed on the chart is the rate of adoption, *squared*.  That is the definition of the value from Metcalfe's Law.

No.  The rate of adoption is currently linear.  The Metcalfe value is exponential.  That is the number of unique addresses used per day, squared.  Vertical is an expression.  The middle of an S curve looks nearly vertical.

Lol.  Two conflicting statements, both intended to piss off holders.  Troll.