I prefer to attempt to think of these matters in a kind of graduated way, yet we should attempt to lock in the timeframe too. If we are talking about never or if we might be talking about this cycle so maybe in the next 3-6 months? Or maybe we could pick "prior to the halvening" or some other timeframe that we might want to consider as a possible relevant talking point.
So then once we pick the time, and let me just presume that you meant prior to the halvening (rather than ever), so if we might say that going below the 200-week moving average might be 50/50 chances, or maybe even greater than 50/50 chances. We are not very far away from the 200-week moving average (currently at $27,218), even though it continues to move up at nearly $16 per day... so then $24k is really not very far from the 200 week moving average either, but maybe the odds might get as low as 20% to 30%, but surely not as low as zero.. but if we might want to be ballsy about it, maybe we could proclaim going below $24k is less than 10%, yet I will still consider you as an exaggerator (or overly confident) if you are placing those kinds of odds on that price, even if you might really believe it, even if you are not sharing your beliefs with others, and even if you might end up being correct, it still does not seem that you are being realistic when you try to make such strict assignments of probabilities.
I appreciate your open mindedness in this regard. The odds of price getting to the $24k region is definitely not zero and can never be. Our job is limited to predicting possible scenarios and act accordingly. While I understand this flexibility, I never really had the motivation to implement it but as I have come to know that you do implement such flexibility, it becomes a good area of improvement in my Bitcoin journey.
Well, the ideas are not necessarily locked in either, especially since some kind of a sudden action could end up changing how the probabilities are calculated, and perhaps even thinking about another way of framing the topic could contribute towards some tweaking of the probabilities that are assigned in that category and also how much probability would be left to assign to other categories once the probability revisions are made.
So, I had been thinking that I could have framed my assessment of what I consider to be 50/50 probabilities a bit more clearly, and sure I might not even be overly-wedded to my own way of framing matters.
For example, my own proclamation about the "don't wake me up zone" of $25k to $35k is a kind of attempt to assert that the BTC price could break out in either direction within that range, so even though the BTC price has not recently gotten above the $31.8k arena, I still currently consider $35k to be within the "don't wake me up zone," so maybe in that sense I am thinking that if we describe/consider the zone in where we are at fairly broadly, then we likely could suggest that we might consider the odds 50/50 whether the BTC price might break out to the upside or to the downside within that zone, and surely other people might want to frame the zone differently, and I am not going to really blame them for defining the zone differently, but I might proclaim that the way that they had defined the zone may well have had lead them to wrong conclusions in regards to probability assignments.
Even by my own framing of the "don't wake me up" zone so broadly, I am likely already conceding within the frame that I believe that there are pretty chances that the BTC price could float around within the $31.8k to $35k area of the zone, and it is not even going to surprise me, but I am not necessarily wanting to assign any specific probability to it, because my framing is already taking that part of the zone as a kind of included area in regards to where the BTC price has pretty great chances of going.
Now, for me, there may well not be any need to reassess the "don't wake me up" zone, until we get a break out in either direction... then if we break out or maybe something else might happen, then the zone and the ideas behind the "don't wake me up" zone may well have to be reassessed at that time.
[edited out]
You have a great deal of experience and thank you for sharing same for us gratis. Going forward, I envisage a lot of improvements in my approach and general disposition towards Bitcoin, and part of the credit will go to you and other senior people here that I have learnt so much from.
I learn from sharing my experiences and ideas, and sometimes there are needs to tweak those ideas (or maybe even completely reject certain aspects) from time to time, too. I am glad that you feel that you got some benefits, and surely if you continue to post on the topics then other members will benefit, and yet sometimes, the benefits will travel outside of the forum too when each of us is interacting in the real world, sometimes we are going to have better quality interactions in the real world based on some of our forum interactions.
$35k in 5 days confirmed
We will arrive soon 
Hahahaha
What a coincidence!!!!
t's all within the don't wake me up zone as long as it does not go below $25k or above $35k.
Go figure?
Oh NJ school voted board voted last night no he's no she's just say all people. Some other nonsense.
"The New Jersey Board of Education narrowly approved in a 6-5 vote last week to approve its equity code, which will include the usage of more gender-neutral terms. The new regulations will require classes to separate sex education classes by gender identity rather than sex.14 hours ago"
source
https://www.njspotlightnews.org/video/njs-board-of-education-approves-new-equity-gender-rules/I am so lucky all my kids died via miscarriages they will never have to face the insane world we live in.
I probably have mentioned it before, but it really seems to irk me when I hear discussions about pregnancy and abortions, and when I hear the term "people" get pregnant/abortions. Sure, I get the point that women are people but it just seems like such a sloppy way of talking... its almost like using the term crypto when we are talking about bitcoin.
Using gender neutral terms in schools seems quite problematic and sure both men and women are likely irritated by these ideas.. maybe some men and women are o.k. with more open language and speculating that it is better to be more inclusive and accepting.. blah blah blah.
I suppose if you identify as something other than a man/boy or woman/girl then maybe you are accepting of the gender neutral language, too.. because you are feeling that neither category fits you... ... It's like you are saying (hoping), I don't fit either category, so I think that the whole system of how we communicate categories should change so that I feel moar better.. but is that going to make you feel better? I suppose it does make you feel better (especially in the short term) and doesn't it seem like everyone else suffers? Are "we" suffering enough yet? Is it "suffering"?
Many of us might get into uncomfortable situations based on these kinds of identity politics, even if we might NOT have already gotten into uncomfortable situations. These ideas make me feel a bit "intolerant," and maybe some of these struggles about nonsense are meant by "TPTB" to contribute towards our feelings of intolerance, so that we are not paying attention to the other ways that the mice are running off with the cheese.
$35k in 5 days confirmed
Couldn’t sent 35 to support
Was at 25 max already
ImageI believed, As @nutildah & @El duderino_ said so that then confirmed.
BillyJoeAllen is that you in the pic?
Poll
