I am and have been a very strong supporter of increasing the blocksize limit and making the blocksize limit to increase with time to allow for the growth of Bitcoin; however a hostile chain is not the way to go about this. One can argue for a lower threshold to tigger the fork, say 70% of the hashpower; however this means that the longest chain is still supporting the fork.

Yes I would agree with this asseseement. My take on this market is that there are a fair number of buyers, some with deep pockets, who have sold XMR and are hoping to buy in the 0.0010 - 0.0020 range. While it may be possible to pick up some XMR in this range, the quantities of XMR required to feed hungry whales may turn out to be a different matter.

Some things to keep in mind here are:
1) The emission is steadiy falling.
2) There has been a steady number of code commits to github over the last six months that are not in the official binaries. The database being the prime example. This creates the false impression that "nothing is happening on the development side".
3) There are a host of external factors that can have a sharp upside impact on the price, starting of course with the 1 MB issue in Bitcoin.

I consider myself a bull in the medium to long term (1-2 years). In the short term: Who knows?

It has also a lot to do with the time frame of the trader / investor. Someone who is looking at a 2 year or longer hold with Monero will appear to be a perma-Bull to a day trader trading Monero on margin.

For starters I have not seen any evidence of Moneero S.A. sending any c&d letters to anyone.

It is a great question and the decentralized status of Monero could easily make the term Monero impossible to trademark especially given that it is also used as a noun. The International Trademark Association has a brochure on what happens to trademarks when they are used as nouns or verbs. http://www.inta.org/Media/Documents/2012_TMUseMediaInternetPublishing.pdf. In reality this can become no different than trying to trademark "gold" as a form of money. Now if we are dealing with a centralized form of digital currency this is another matter entirely.

Edit: Sending a cease and desist letter can also open the possibility of litigation against the sender by those who are impacted. In the case of a decentralised currency such as Monero this can be anyone who holds, trades or does any business involving Monero.

By perms-Bulls do you mean those who were buying at 0.00110 from those who were selling at 0.00110 hoping to buy back at 0.0080? It is true that in the short term the perms-Bulls were wrong in that the bottom was 0.00091. It really all depends on the trader's time frame.

There is a registered trademark for Moneero in the United States to as per the USPTO. They claim The registration number is  86158015. so far so good. I see however a problem here: Most if not all the services they claim trademark / servicemark rights over require registration with FinCEN and there is no record of a FinCEN registration for Moneero S.A at http://www.fincen.gov/financial_institutions/msb/msbstateselector.html.

I do not know if any cease and desist letters have been sent and to whom. The first question that comes to my mind is does the defence of "Unclean Hands" http://definitions.uslegal.com/u/unclean-hands/ apply to a situation where a company is claiming trademark infringement in the United States over services that require registration with FinCEN, and the company is not registered as an MSB with FinCEN?

Now where else did I see the defence of "unclean hands" claimed in trademark disputes involving crypto-currencies?

Now how many punched cards, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punched_card, does it take to store this video? Furthermore how many trees have to be cut down to make these punched cards?  Distribution of video in digital form is totally unsustainable and very damaging to the environment.

Yes but in the example cited there are overt actions to clear data, including unistalling software and defragmenting the hard drive after the individual involved met with the alleged terrorists, in addition to lying to police. This is very different from someone who as a matter of course does clear data rather than just in the "special" cases that could reasonably be of interest to law enforcement. There is a clear case of intent here.

Actually Microsoft was the first PRISM data provider. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_%28surveillance_program%29#/media/File:Prism_slide_5.jpg The problems with Apple go far deeper than the NSA and are rooted in the IOS business model that was started with the iPhone. What makes this so abhorrent is that Apple uses DRM to only allow applications from their own store to run on IOS devices. This turns the App Store into the perfect tool for censorship and surveillance in effect turning IOS devices into Portable Orwellian Telescreens https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telescreen. This form of censorship was applied to censor Bitcoin until last year and is currently used to censor Bitcoin, Monero and every other cryptocurrency in certain markets for example China. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1085047.msg11571471#msg11571471. In addition to this Apple simply has extremely poor security as was evidenced by the nude selfie incident, failing the most basic concepts such as not allowing automated mass logins to run brute force attacks on a password.

What I fail to understand is how people can trust Apple or Microsoft and not trust the state. This makes no sense to me at all.

Edit: I should point out that if I was given the contract by the Ministry of Love to deploy the Telescreens in George Orwell's 1984, I would use Windows 8.1 RT devices over IOS devices because Apple's poor security makes jailbreaking IOS possible.

No thanks. I will wait for the Android app.

IOS is a DRM infested walled garden contolled by a centralized authority, Apple, that co-operates closely not only with the NSA but with many security agencies around the world. The design of IOS goes against all three pillars of Monero,  privacy, decentralization and scalability.  https://forum.getmonero.org/1/news-announcements-and-editorials/183/editorial-the-three-pillars-of-monero.

I would not go near borrowing Bitcoin. One takes out a loan in Bitcoin in the winter of 2001 - 2012 when Bitcoin was trading around 2 USD and then 2 years later it is worth 1000 USD. I prefer something that depreciates in value such as most fiat currencies when it comes to borrowing.

Someone is playing around with a large fake buy wall

That is interesting to know.

Edit: 1) Put app on http://allcydia.com/ 2) crack DRM 3) app will work.

We must keep in mind that Apple used DRM to censor Bitcoin until last year. The lowest that Bitcoin has been since Apple gave the iSheep permission to buy Bitcoin was 152.4 USD on Bitstamp. Those of use who use GNU/Linux and stay well away from operating systems infected with DRM could buy Bitcoin in 2009 - 2013 at prices well below. I bought many Bitcoins in the 2 USD to 10 USD range in 2011 - 2012, and there are those who bought well below those prices.

Anyone who is truly interested in innovation should stay well away from Apple and its DRM infested walled gardens.

Edit 1: The iSheep are there to be fleeced.

Edit 2: I understand that jailbreaking IOS is far more popular in China than in the United States. This could part of the reason why China has much higher economic growth.

The bolded part is true. Let use not forget it says many coins not all coins.

They are still thinking in terms of punch cards. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punched_card Don't you understand how many punchcards it takes to store 512 GB, and how many forests will have to be cut down for each rewrite of the data.

Bigger blocks do scale. One only needs to step back and take a look at the history of technology over the last 50 years and the last 200 years.

Keeping the 1 MB blocksize limit in Bitcoin makes as much sense as running the VISA network using the tabulating machine and punch card technology of the 1930's and 1940's

XMR - Monero
XBT - Bitcoin
NMC - Namecoin

Adaptive limits is a core feature of Monero; however it is not one that has had a lot of attention in the Monero community. The issue of the fixed blocksize limit has been festering in the Bitcoin community since 2010. It has been and still is my single biggest concern I have with Bitcoin. I found out about Monero while researching this issue back in 2014, and it is one of the main reasons why I invested in Monero. I was not involved in alt-coins at all other than Namecoin which I obtained as a by product of Bitcoin mining.

The reality is that there is not really any practical alternative to Monero for someone who is looking at an alt-coin to hedge against this issue in Bitcoin. The only other POW alt-coin ahead of Monero in capitalization that deals with this issue is Bytecoin and we all know the problems with Bytecoin.

I leave it to the reader to determine would could happen if even a a very small fraction of the current funds in Bitcoin decide to follow in my footsteps.