Try to stay objective, okay?
Are you coaching yourself here?
I do NOT want to assume anything, but it seems to me that you may be a little frustrated to have to defend your comment because you are internally of the belief that it is so obviously an objective fact that bitcoin followers are cultish, and NOT an insult to be calling people in this thread cultists. Just because it has some basis in truth, and you can find some of the pointed out behaviours in the real world does NOT make the conclusion correct. A lot of myths have some basis in reality. A lot of propaganda has some basis in reality. A lot of trolling comments have some basis in reality. Merely because some observed conclusions have some basis in reality does NOT make them true.
So now it's "degrading" to use the word cultist for, well, cult like behavior? I don't think so.
I do think so. You are trying to simplify matters, and you are trying to suggest that a large number of people who are pro-bitcoin have NO brains.
As for the numbers, I don't have hard data, and I cannot have data because what I would call "cultish" is hardly a set-in-stone definition, but to give a few examples:
You do NOT have numbers because the accusation is based on purely anecdotal evidence. Surely, cultish can mean a lot of different things, but it does have a definition and the definition is generally derogatory and applied to religious behavior. Bitcoin is NOT a religion and NOT religious behavior, even though there may be some examples in which you can point to people within bitcoin who are demonstrating those same kinds of behaviours. Even though you can point to that kind of behavior in various bitcoin communities, that mere fact does NOT meet the cultish definition for the group or to say “many in here” are cultish goes to imply that coltishness is some kind of wide-spread phenomenon in bitcoin.
Remember the guy who sold his house to invest it all in btc. Zero risk control, just puts all his wealth into one of the riskiest assets on earth. What's the overwhelming response in his thread? "Good on you! You won't regret it!". The dissenting voices are in the minority. That's cultish, in my book.
So what? Some people are going to demonstrate irrational exuberance with all kinds of their investments, and bitcoin should be no different than that. At what price did he invest in bitcoin? Is he currently at a profit or a loss? If he is holding long term, then great, he may be ahead at some point in the near future. But with any investment, he may lose the amount that he invested. The fact that people agree with his investment does NOT prove that it is a cult, either, it proves that they have confidence that the odds are good for btc prices to go up. For example, if you invest $1000 in bitcoin, you could lose $1000 or you could potentially gain $100,000 or some in between result could occur. The mere fact that someone is betting the farm on bitcoin does NOT necessarily mean that bitcoin is a cult or that his behavior was cultish. It depends on the circumstances of that particular case.
The kneejerk reaction to mentioning the /possibility/ of total failure of our little experiment. Please note, the exact likelihood of total failure (as in: price approaching 0) is up for debate, but I'm pretty sure a rational observer will admit that there is a real chance for the (publically traded) price to go back to 0 (or at least, close to it), in case of catastrophic failure of parts of the network (like a major flaw on the encryption side), or some other event that causes an absolute loss of trust in the safety of the network. Try talking about that in here. The responses /should/ be "Okay, that's possible, but unlikely." The responses /are/ actually "No! Absolutely impossible! Logically invalid!".
So what? Surely there are some people who think that it is impossible for bitcoin to go to zero, but I would think that would be an exception. I would think that most here would admit that there are real possibilities that bitcoin could go to zero, but they put the odds of that very low. That does NOT make them a cult, even though some people here may from time to time be inarticulate or incomprehensible when making their response to any given situation (myself included). Sometimes we talk in extreme terms or exaggerate our positions to make a point – even though if push comes to shove we may NOT be 100% wedded to the point that we are making. Some comments are spins, some comments are visceral reactions and some comments are very well thought through. In a streaming forum, you are going to get a wide array of reactions, and do NOT expect all of the reactions to be well thought through or a reflection of the posters true and deep down feelings or beliefs.
Go back a few pages when TERA suggested offhandedly what a blockchain "reset" would look like, and look at the reactions. That's cultish.
Yes, agreed that this kind of thing could happen with bitcoin and cause considerable logistical difficulties and possibly even completely destroy some or all of the value in the bitcoin holders. Again, so what? How likely is this to happen? Does this possibility mean that I should sell my BTC today? I am personally diversified, and NOT everyone is diversified in a balanced way… but so what? People take risks, and some of us (probably many of us) are NOT technologically sophisticated enough to really understand the various technological components of bitcoin and to assess the likelihood of a blockchain reset. Even technological people do NOT understand all aspects of bitcoin when it comes to dealing with all possibilities of human corruption or the abilities of humans to employ quantum computing or social engineering to undermine or to destroy or to manipulate bitcoin in various ways.
Merely because we do NOT understand it and merely because we dismiss various potentially valid arguments does NOT make us cultish.
The sense of "We're in this together, on the way up, and on the way down." It's only human to band together, but the article is spot on when it points out the phrasing of those "public messages" by well known BTC community members, that sound like rallying cries, to keep the troops in line. It's like military esprit de corps, or, well, a cult.
You may know that bitcoin is being attacked in various ways and bitcoin is a threat in various ways to many status quo forces. There may be some we behavior going on and attempts to rally solidarity, but in the end, there are a lot of individuals who are making decisions for themselves. Some people my follow andreas antonopolis (or some other bitcoin enthusiasts/evangelists) and to listen to everything that he says… so what? Sometimes, trust is built, but are we going to drink coolaide when they tell us to drink coolaide. Some will, but so what? Overall, there is NOT that much control over “many.” “Many” have considerable confidence that bitcoin is going to continue to prosper and to expand and to go up in prices. “Many” also hope and pray that BTC goes up in prices so that they can make a lot of money… so what? These behaviors are NOT cultish, just because you and others in the mainstream media keep repeating that they are cultish.
In case this is important to you, I still believe BTC has a real shot at success (where the exact type of success is up for debate). But I completely agree with Blitz: a lot of arguments in here are very clearly not motivated by rational analysis, but by make believe and selective perception.
So you are trying to suggest that you see reality better than other people? You and Blitz. You guys/gals are objective and the rest of us are delusional? Get off your high horse. Many people go through the same kinds of mixed feelings as you an blitz – though maybe others are NOT so presumptive to begin to call others names because of their knowledge level. Surely, there are several levels of knowledge, and sometimes people just go forward with their investment choice of buy or hodl based on faith, but so what? Some people also may NOT have a lot of time to investigate, and they will invest based on what others are doing. Some also engage in wishful thinking and select the facts that they want to be true… and in the end, there is a lot of variety in knowledge levels and what facts people are going to recognize as being true or plausible.
To call it "cultish" is confrontational, but not wrong, in my opinion.
Yes. It is both confrontational and wrong to call “most in here” as cultish. It’s denigrating and it is an oversimplification, and playing into mainstream propaganda. Even though there is some truth to the myth, you are wrong to be propagating this kind of bullshit framework in order to denigrate people who come from a variety of persepctives and many of whom would like to come to these kinds of threads and to participate in these kinds of threads in order to become better informed about bitcoin – rather than to be denigrated, merely because they may be enthusiastic about the prospects of bitcoin.
Poll
