There were some brief spikes that got into the 40% arena, yet those would have had been quite tough to catch, and yeah, there could have been some aberrations that touched upon 50%.
Yeah of course it was hard, but if we say it was possible to get like 30% then we may as well say the full story. Some people did get that 50% even if they were probably lucky, but I am happy for them.
Just because some trades were made at that price of nearly 50% of a BTC, I doubt it is realistic to suggest that it would have had been any kind of an outcome that was very possible to accomplish except some stroke of luck.. so in that sense it is not very representative even though nothing wrong with suggesting that there were spikes that might have had gotten that high briefly.
But hey, do whatever you like...
From my perspective, when sides exaggerate facts and logic they lose credibility...even though sure, sometimes it might be fair to throw in some exaggerations to get in some digs...whether we are here to burn bridges or not, sometimes we still might want to attempt to represent facts fairly or even give benefits of the doubt...even though sometimes, arguments will also devolve out of control, too.
It could be that we can lecture guys about exercising poor judgement.. yet we don't always know the circumstances of the other guys.. It probably does help to also speak about some personal experiences if we are comparing / contrasting what other guys had done if we might believe that we would have had dealt with the circumstances better.
Well in my case I sold a bit too early, but I had no doubts about any of this. I could not say for sure how much in percentage it was this was a long time ago. I do remember selling other forks too like that Bitcoin Diamond and some others. Wasn't there also another airdrop around this type Byteball or something like this? I remember also getting some from that.
Airdrops and forks were very popular through out late 2017 and even into a good part of 2018 - there were quite a few of them..and then maybe the started to fade out in late 2018.. and some of them were starting to have some spectacular implosions by late 2018. I think Diamond and Gold and private and a few others were in late 2017... Of course BSV did not split off from BCH until November 2018... so there was drama around that for a good 6-9 months or more.
Obviously, I don't consider holding onto BCH to have had been a "safe move" unless perhaps the person was a bit delusional about what was going on, and surely we had quite a bit of arguments going on in various parts of the forum that seemed to contain some delusional components.. including some of the goals that were seeking to be achieved.
Many were delusional and tricked by smart looking arguments unfortunately. If you repeat a lie too many times it starts looking like the truth to some people..
It really took a couple of years for a lot of that to play out... and yeah, there were surely casualties and even innocent folks sucked into the bcash and other shitcoin talking points, yet bcash was the most popular of the bitcoin forks...which might be part of the reason Biodom latched onto it a bit more than reasonable in current times, as if it were something any of us should give any shits about...especially in this thread.
By the way, BitHodlers your characterization of Bcash as if it were led by Roger Ver only is a bit of a delusional framing of history. Sure, Ver was one of the main bcash proponents, yet there were plenty of other causes of Bcash's level of success (pumpening) rather than just Ver and his influencing, marketing and/or manipulation attempts.
Perhaps it is a bit mistaken yes, but without Roger Ver there would have been no fork war and there would have not been that much damage done to Bitcoin. He's not the only one but he was the main actor I would say?
You might be speaking in some levels of truths based on free market ideas Gachapin, yet it seems to me that forks still might be attacks - depending on how they are done, and yeah outcomes might not end up being just, even if there ends up being a prevalent outcome that we can subsequently characterize as the free market "winner."
Forks can be options but from our history here they were exclusively only attacks.
I think that overall they were attacks too, yet I don't think any of us need to fight to the death on this one... even though perhaps there seems to be disagreement from some guys and some guys are still sympathetic to shitcoins, trading, gambling and even have loose ideas about what bitcoin is, perhaps thinking that bitcoin is nothing much more than something that has a tendency to go up and down in price..perhaps more up than down, but still..there are guys here who have differing perceptions of bitcoin and some of the errors in "their" thinking is greater than others...
That it is about democratic choice is purely a theoretical case in practice this was never true yet. It is important to remember this when a government launches a fork attack on Bitcoin.
Bitcoin is not democratic, and some governments are not democratic that claim to be, and yeah, I agree with you that some governments might start to see bitcoin as an existential threat, which some members within governments already feel that way, and they might not even be well informed except realizing that bitcoin takes away some of the abilities for governments to do some of the things that it historically had been able to do.. so they may or may not understand bitcoin when they are attacking bitcoin because bitcoin disrupts their own systems of wealth, power and status... and they might not want to adjust to bitcoin because they see areas in which they believe bitcoin to be vulnerable, which may or may not be true, even thugh the perception of vulnerabilities inspires them to attack bitcoin rather than trying to figure out ways to live in harmony with it.
Some folks also detest the personal empowerment and self-sovereignty aspects of bitcoin.. so battles are likely to continue for many years into the future and hopefully number will continue to go up during this time and none of us become too large of casualties due to some of the battles that might sometimes end up getting taken out on individuals. Be careful out there, boiz.
[edited out]
I sold my BCH way too late.
2017, I didn't want to make a decision on which fork market would choose.
And after it was clear that BTC was the one, I still kept BCH because it was the only coin with the same mining algo. So if something where to happen to the BTC chain, I thought many miners would switch to BCH. So it was always a kind of a hedge for me.
But yeah I'd have over 30% more BTC now, if I had sold earlier. It was an expensive hedge, if it ever was one at all
"I kept my BCH as a hedge" to "I would have had made 30% more BTC if I had sold it"..
In hindsight, I should have sold yes. But at that time it was the safest decision, to keep both coins.
But surely, back in 2017 you already knew 100% how everything would play out... You are like in a fantasylandia, since there were rare folks who were even able to get more than 20% more BTC from whatever BCH they might have had been able to muster up from splitting their private wallets.. and it seems to me that Bitfinex was one of the only, if not the only, exchange that said that they would recognize the split right from the start (and it seems that they made the split coins available within a few hours of the hardfork).
Kraken did as well if I'm not mistaken
Are you trying to be facetious to suggest that any of us knew how the various forkening and big/small blocker battles were going to play out?
I think that we are largely agreeing that there was a bit of nervousness regarding how matters were going to play out, so there was some practicality in hedging even if guys mioght have had chosen the ways and the amounts of their hedges in differing ways.
i never checked, but is there supposed to be a minimum age on this forum?
I recall that the minimum age is 9 years old.
is that in AI years?
Unlike the JJG!
My forum age is almost 12.
Poll
