Tone Vays and some of his following used to spout out that kind of nonsense regarding having to retest $1,300, and they were arguing that point for much of 2018, 2019 and maybe even in 2020... it's just nonsense talk to say that we "have to" test down support before we are ready and able to go up.


You should not be fucking around with alts anyhow.  Many of us in this thread are neither here to talk about shitcoins nor to hear about other members and their poor judgement choices to be involved in shitcoins. 

The Italian stallion seems to know a lot about this particular topic.




Oh Gawd!!!!  Moar single entity theories. 

It's a bit difficult to feel sorry for you and your ongoing expressions of hopium regarding your bcash shitcoins and even your regular demonstrations of self-righteousness about that bcash shitcoin topic. 

The actions of you and your shitcoinery buddies seem to be ongoing acts of hostility towards king daddy, so I have some troubles with sympathy in regards to scammy, shitcoin pumpening, meritless and misleading attacks on bitcoin, too.

Maybe my feelings do fit in the crocodile tears category, to the extent such tears exist in regards to you and your fellow shitcoiners?

In theory, your rendition of a rotation of merit sources sounds like it could work; however, factually and theoretically based on such facts, there seems to be a lot of difficulties already.

I can theorize at least three difficulties:

1) We had already seen that theymos seems to be having difficulties establishing any kind of decently large sized pool of merit sources that he is willing to assign.  He started out with something like 35 merit sources, and he intermittently increased the merit sources to about 130, one year later (or maybe less than a year later).  In the past year, the number of merit sources has only been 100, so the pool seems a bit small, anyhow.

2) Let's say hypothetically theymos could get up to a higher number of merit sources, 200 or 300, then you would be suggesting to rotate those merit sources in and out.. seems a bit logistically problematic but also could create a lot of confusion and even de-spirit merit sources from wanting to engage in the process. 

3) A lot of extra work for theymos to administer, and since the merit system runs on a kind of algorithm, it seems that duty periods should be longer than 4 months, just to let the algorithm run out for a while and the merit source to get some bearings about what is happening - but then even theymos might still haver difficulties in monitoring such a system that would be changing so frequently.

I don't want to be a party poop, but just seems like a bit of an administrative nightmare and also one that would create a lot of frustration to merit sources, assuming that they are even able to get used to the various periodic changes.




Of course, theymos can remove merit source status for any members who seem to be engaging in abuses, but if they are periodically dumping more merits than they "should be dumping" then how would theymos even know the difference between too much dumping?  He would just know it when he sees it?

I have always had a policy to just spend 1 merit per post, with the exception of 2 or three merits from time to time, but even I have found that giving one merit per post can take a lot of time, sometimes, and sometimes I just feel that I do not have that much time to be reading posts.

I recall a few months after the merit system was implemented, theymos said that merit sources should give lump sum merits whenever they could.  I never really employed such a strategy of giving merits, even though theymos proclaimed that giving lump sum merits would be a good way to send merits.



I agree with your presumption that merit sources are likely to receive some merit sources because they are merit sources, but you really believe that it would be practical to have a rule against merit sources sending merits to other merit sources?  As you likely realize, there is not even any kind of official forum acknowledgement regarding who are the merit sources, even though Coin-1 maintains an unofficial thread in which he attempts to identify merit sources, whether they had admitted to being merit sources or his algorithm had detected that they are merit sources.  Again, that is not even an official forum acknowledgement, and surely some of the merit sources could change from time to time, too... even though Coin-1 attempts to announce any detections or even announcements on a monthly basis.

I am having troubles with really considering theymos to be motivated to implement your suggested changes, and of course, like anyone else I have troubles reading theymos's mind, unless he actually directly addresses the matter. 

There had been speculation that theymos might make changes to merit sources 6 months after the last changes (last changes or major changes were in November 2019), yet the last changes were nearly 10 months ago.   I think that some of the reluctancies to make changes to the merit system is that it can become a bit complicated to make changes including trade offs, and still it some sense to figure out ways to increase the number of merit sources, rather than creating systems (or subsystems) that just create more administrative complications without any kind of clear and probable benefit to perhaps resolve some of the problems that you, timelord, are perceiving.. to the extent that theymos might perceive those as meaningful and material problems, too (which might be a BIG presumption). 

It is likely that any changes that theymos does make would attempt to remove or add merit sources to attempt to achieve or improve some kinds of semblance of fairness in the way that merits are being spent by merit sources to the extent that fairness might not already sufficiently exist... and of course, again, if there is a sense that merit sources are abusive in their spending of merit sources, then theymos has the ability to unilaterally remove those members as a merit source or reduce the quantity of their source (to the extent that he knows about the alleged problem and agrees that such a problem exists with one or more merit source member(s)).

Any suggestions on how to improve some of those dynamics that you have identified, timelord?

Maybe more merit sources, or rotate merit sources?

Or scrap the whole system?

Would you speculate that the merit system helped the forum at all since its January 2018 implementation, or did the merit system make the forum worse?

As you may know, the forum's ranking system did exist prior to the implementation of the merit system.  The merit system was implemented on January 24, 2018, as you can verify that from the OP of this thread.

Implicitly, you are correct that the merit system was intended to affect the behavior of members (at least in terms of attempting to filter out some kinds of negative behaviors such as spamming, shilling and account farming). 

Seems that the merit system was not directly intended to punish the regular users, even though it does seem to have an effect of rewarding the kinds of posts that other users find useful, helpful and/or entertaining. 

Sure, there is a certain amount of subjectivity in how merits are sent - even though there was likely a goal that the merit system would bring UP the quality of posts of the membership, overall, an it seems to me that member posts have improved since the implementation of the merit system (other members have also reported that they believe that post quality has improved overall after the implementation of the merit system).

I did a quick glance at your post history erikoy, and generally, you do seem to have helpful posts, so I am NOT sure why you have not been receiving more merits with the passage of time - perhaps you had been posting a lot in the altcoin section (seems that to be the case in quite a bit of your forum history), and there might not be as many merit sources that spend time in those sections... but of course, you are free to believe whatever you will in terms of the difference between bitcoin and shitcoins.. I am not really sure - especially since I only did a quick look at your posts.

Lookie at Jbreher.

Never failing to prepare for the pumpening of crap.



It's going to look like this, once the crap starts to pumpening.





You are going to need some luck, beyond mere preparations, jbreher.

Yes.., more or less that is what merits are,  and they help members to achieve higher ranks, too, in the even that you want to rank up.

Ranking up is not necessary in order for members to be able to participate in most of the regular areas of the forum in terms of posting and reading posts (except there are rank requirements for posting in a few of the sections within serious discussions and maybe some other special areas of the forum).  Most signature campaigns have rank and/or merit requirements and some other forum related ventures (such as bounty campaigns) might have minimum merit requirements, too..  Personally, I am not very familiar with bounty areas.

Thanks for that description about how to get to that kind of a weighted-average number for the monthly, yefi.  Your description makes sense.   

I agree that the monthly weighted average does seem to be an interesting calculation that could be added to the top 100 daily listings (but then it is no longer merely daily), if you believe that you can do it in such a way that does not clutter the ability to digest the information contained in those updates.   Alternatively, there could be a sister thread that would have monthly or some other timelines, weekly, quarterly, yearly... where do you stop?

Of course, when you add any of those kinds of features (or extra data points), you are adding work for yourself, but the rest of us tend to benefit from being able to look at running tallies like that to the extent that we can understand what those kinds of numbers mean... which is probably a continuous challenge to present information in such a way that even newbies are able to get some meaning from the information that is presented without getting caught up with too much information. 

Even that top 100 daily information is a quite profound kind of information that newbies might not understand by merely looking at it, but you do have links that describe how the numbers are calculated, which is likely helpful to those who are willing to try to go to the next level of understanding of the information that they are viewing.

Of course, accounting for trade volume would be a bit more accurate for providing an average BTC price for each month.. that would end up being a volume weighted average price, but sure, it is understandable that your looking at the numbers might not calculate for trade volume, since it is a bit more complicated to achieve a volume weighted BTC price.

So, are the averages that you had listed in your above chart meant to be for the whole month? taking an average what the price would have been for each of the days of the month?  Or is it calculated in a different way?  I see that the CSV download (the one that I did) had given the BTC price each hour for the past 30 days (something like that or maybe it was 31 days?).. I suppose that you could average all of those prices that are in that hourly chart and then arrive at an approximation of monthly average that is close, but does not quite account for the trade volume variance.



I am not sure, Jimbo.

I am not sure if we can breath easily until we get above $13,880, no?

$13,880 is the 2019 high, and could provide a bit of a challenge.

Of course, the vast majority of us longer term BTC hodlers realize that $13,880 is going to fall, but we cannot really be sure that we are going to get past that price point on this particular run, can we?

Sure, it is possible to go flying past $13,880, too, and I would suspect that the next resistance point after $13,880 is going to be somewhere in the vicinity of $17,250... tentative ideas, of course.

A bit of OT, admittedly:  Vitalik does not have anything even close to approximating the level of muscularity of that portrait.  #justsaying


Why you asking me, specifically?

I looked it up and oxen is merely a term used for cattle that have been trained to perform work.. could be casterated or not or even cows can serve such working purposes and be referred to as oxen.



Lot's of cultures eat everything.. and some cultures eat sexual organs for sexual potency reasons, whether mythical or not.


You seem to be wanting to stretch knowledge and entertain FUD bullshit.  Do you have some kind of point that is actually important and genuine that relates to king daddy, Cryptotourist? or are you just engaging in baloney talk by making nonsensical and meaningless connections?  Failing and refusing to grow up a wee bit, perhaps?

We have the ethheads going crazy too, and currently talking about impending flippening,, again...

So yeah.. lots of crazy hype out there in the macrospaces that might continue to go UPpity or might come crashing down.

I continue to be content with my seemingly modest bitcoin gainz (and seemingly ongoing modest bitcoin price movements)...

Hopefully we are considering both the upside and the downside...  

Is bitcoin going to be able to hold its own through all of this ongoing volatility when it comes to possible UP and possible DOWN, and where do you want to be?  How much allocated in each of these various asset classes?


The diptwat - aka hv_ , is merely speaking in tongues in terms of trying to suggest that BSV is bitcoin... You cannot take anything that he says at face value, that dweeb.  

From where are you getting the monthly traded volume data?  How is it calculated?

I know that you can get daily traded volume BTC price on Bitstamp from:

https://bitcoincharts.com/charts/bitstampUSD#rg60ztgSzm1g10zm2g25zv  (click on "load raw data" at the bottom of the chart, and it will show daily traded volume for the past couple of months (maybe 60 days?)

I have gotten used to listening to podcasts at faster speeds, but I did have to slow down with Naval.  He has a lot of ideas in a short amount of space (dense material), so I was probably around 1.2x with him.


I think so, too.  I also have a bit of a dilemma regarding even hypothesizing myself in my early 20s.  Of course, I was a lot more receptive to do a lot of things and to learn a lot of things, but even in my early 20s, I was still stubborn in some regards in terms of wanting to learn what I wanted to learn - I was limited.  So, in that regard, I might have been able to really advantage myself from the teachings of Naval; however, at the same time, I might not have been able to understand certain aspects of what he is saying, like I can today.

Maybe that is part of the reason that younger people today can really end up putting themselves on a different path than what was even available to me in my early 20s.  Of course, learning these days too, is a lot more communication enhanced, which can complicate matters, but creates leverage that was not available when I was in my 20s.. I am not so much receptive to attempting to learn how to maximize my profits from using such leverage today because I am at a different stage of maintaining rather than accumulating and even entering into a kind of quasi-liquidating stage of my life... which I recognize that I am repeating myself, too.


Looking back, I feel that I got lucky in a lot of ways.  I do recognize that a few things that I did that really put myself ahead is living within my means, always investing a portion of my savings and engaging in some kinds of active experimentation and monitoring of my investments - including using credit for investment (not consumption).  One of the areas that I was lacking, and maybe even continue to be lacking is the desire and pursuit of money.  So there have likely been times in which I could have pursued some avenues of life to actually monetize my activities better, and I chose non-monetizing  and even less monetizing routes - but I still did end up getting some fairly lucrative gigs along the way - which I kind of attribute to kinds of luck.


Yes, being aware of these various these various trade offs does likely end up having longer term payoffs, a kind of compounding benefit as Naval seems to suggest that ends up paying off later down the road in BIG kinds of ways.


There likely still can be ways to use some of the concepts, even if we are older and might not be in the prime of our career.

So we might have some questions regarding whether learning some new skills might benefit ourselves, whether it is financially, psychologically or our physical health... and so yeah, some of those skills can provide certain kinds of leverage, too.

With bitcoin there can be some advantages to learning some kinds of code, too.. just to be able to look at code or to verify whether certain kinds of equipment, software or set-ups might be secure or learning how to ensure that you are able to monitor or lessen some security holes within our newly found way of holding and transmitting value, aka through king daddy.


I was pretty early in the listening to podcasts space.  I believe that I was listening to podcasts in 2007 or maybe even a bit earlier than that.  I was a pretty BIG fan of books on tape and even checking out various books on tapes from libraries in the 80s and 90s and early 2000s.   Audio predecessors to podcasts.

Of course, there were not that many podcasts available back then, and even a lot of the earliest podcasts that I listen to are no longer even putting out current editions.  I kind of got into the habit of listening on headphones or in the car or when I was doing various chores (at least the less mind-intensive chores). I cannot recall using 2x features until around 2012 or maybe it was even later than that.. because I recall when I started using overcast, it allowed variations in playback speeds that were more gradient compared to what Itunes was then offering.  Only recently (within the past year or two, perhaps?) has YouTube been allowing for variations in the playback speeds.

Sometimes listening can be a lot easier, but probably Naval is correct when he asserts that reading gives a way better potentiality for learning at a higher level.  There can be value in absorbing materials in various ways, but writing can also be helpful in terms of showing the degree that you understand some materials, too.  But, yeah, if you are doing a variety of chores, whether painting or some other chores, it could be helpful to have some materials - even while there can also be some value in just staring at the paint too (aka meditating), as that earlier pic of you seems to have captured.    

I will follow-up and say that I did listen to the 3.5 hour Naval podcast linked above.  I do agree that the podcast is good, educational, motivational, and it is directed at thinking through a variety of getting rich concepts, especially in modern times with modern dynamics.

 I may listen to more of them in the future, but I will say that I never really had similar kinds of thinking as Naval or even any kind of direct desire to get rich - so I might not be very fitting in terms of his audience... 

So probably for now I can reserve some judgement, and perhaps listen to some more of the podcasts later down the road.. .  I do not feel as if I am at a business or even wealth building stage in my life, so there is that angle of potentially differing interests, too.

What about the below extension of the chart from the 8/6/20 chart?  I see that 8/2, 8/3 and 8/4 prices are all above $11k.


  76  2019-06-25  11,330  
  77  2017-12-04  11,314
  78  2019-06-30  11,302
  79  2018-01-25  11,301
  80  2018-01-27  11,287  
  81  2018-01-29  11,284  
  82  2020-08-03  11,283  
  83  2020-08-02  11,281  
  84  2019-07-13  11,281  
  85  2018-03-04  11,279  
  86  2017-12-03  11,249  
  87  2020-07-31  11,240  
  88  2020-08-04  11,216
  89  2020-07-29  11,129  
  90  2019-07-05  11,115  
  91  2018-01-24  11,060  
  92  2019-08-13  11,043  
  93  2020-07-30  11,023  
  94  2018-03-02  10,980
  95  2020-07-28  10,965  
  96  2018-03-06  10,961  
  97  2017-12-02  10,927  
  98  2018-02-19  10,924  
  99  2018-01-22  10,899  
 100  2018-01-26  10,880  


We entered supra $11k on 7/29 and have been supra $11k ever since.

Jojo sent me a private message, and based on that, I am pretty sure that it was a duck that had his tongue. 



He seems to be attempting a recovery.

I might call you delusional, rather than bearish.

Sure there is a lot of sentiment out there regarding gold serving as a sufficient and adequate hedge against ongoing fiscal irresponsibility.. but you really believe that gold is providing anything that bitcoin is NOT going to be providing in the coming years?

Not only is bitcoin better than gold in terms of portability, divisibility, verifiability and a few other important characteristics, bitcoin also has the exponential s-curve adoption aspect, which surely is an unfair advantage for bitcoin to be going through early stages of adoption while gold hardly has anywhere to go in terms of actual adoption, but why would the market give any shits about the fairness of this particular situation... eg the lopsided circumstances favoring bitcoin?

So sure, maybe you won't lose your wealth as fast in gold as you might lose it in various kinds of fiat-based investments, but I still am NOT sure where you are speculating that you might be able to get something from gold that you cannot get from bitcoin... Seems to me that you are likely speculating about gold's value proposition based on longer history and the already existence of financial instruments that are going to easily allow traditional financial institutions to quickly get into gold, but really?  you believe gold is going to perform as well as bitcoin in the coming years?

What's coming first?  A $10k gold or a $60k bitcoin?  Both are around 5x price appreciation points from today's price.  Which one is getting there first?  You betting evenly on this? You have 50% in each?

How about after gold reaches $10k (hypothetically)?  You gonna get another 4x out of gold, to $40k?  you going to bet on that happening?

How about bitcoin?  Do you consider that bitcoin could arrive at $240k (that is 4x after reaching $60k) a bit more easily after it had already 5x'd as compared with gold arriving at $60k after it had already gotten to $10k?

I could keep going on with higher and higher numbers, and the upside still seems way more favorable for bitcoin as compared to grandpa coin (aka gold) reaching those higher numbers.

Make your bets however you choose, OOM, but I am having troubles appreciating how you might be so willing to suggest that gold is reasonable, feasible and necessary in light of where king daddy happens to be and where king daddy seems likely to be going in the coming years.

Edit:  Clarified a few points and fixed a few typos.

Surely, I am not rushing it.  I am willing to go with the flow.  You are the one who seems to be anticipating possible calamaties based on various unknowns that you seem to want to assign unduly high (relatively speaking) levels of probabilities


Good job.   One of the most potent techniques of effective argumentation is to deny first and ask questions later.


Well that's what you seemed to have been doing.

You lumped everyone else, and proclaimed that you were not part of such group.       Another "great" technique.    


O.k.  we won't call it doom and gloom anymore, we will call it self-destructive urge.  Is that better?



I am sure that there is variation, but the longer that we are in such business, the more likely that some of the BIGGER players are going to engage in more efficient practices in order to attempt to out compete the more reckless players, to the extent that they are able to profit from maximizing efficiencies through sounder business practices.


If you merely agree with me, then you are giving me nothing to argue with you about.


ditto, my above response here.


I can see that you are getting angry toxicmoxic, and I am sorry about that.  


You better reboot and come back with some better proclamations.. .Maybe hook up with torque?  He's been coming out with some doosey conspiracy wannabe theories, lately.    


TheJuice = pessimist (aka party poop)   

#thatisall

Seems like you are merely engaging in generalizations, to me.

Individuals have all kinds of motivations, and lumping them all into some kind of amorphous group, as if they are the enemy, seems a bit lacking in understanding of what is actually going on... but hey, we are each entitled to our own opinions.


Aren't you hootie and falootie knowing about all things, including what is permissible and legal.... a self-assigned protest expert... yeah right.


My statements likely make more sense than your overgeneralizations, even though I will admit that I was merely responding to you and not really attempting to descriptively capture the whole space, as you seemed to have been attempting to do.