[ANN] Bitcoin Cash - Pro on-chain scaling - Cheaper fees

[Grrizz]

You failed to call out anything with any valid information.  You failed to call out bek77 for his spinning of information, but if I had to guess it fuels your narrative so there's no surprise is there?  

The fact is that the price of trading of BCC at the time of China announcing ICO bans was lower relative to the price at the time that another poster (bek77) claimed the price was falling..

 BCC is still relatively up (from the time of that news)


*opposed  

All he said was "the price continues to fall", which in the current trend is true, if you want to talk about the longer trend then its pretty much sideways. You can pick arbitrary points to make it look any which way you like but I dont see the point in that.

Relative to what? Falling from what?  You must see some point as you selectively chose to ignore the trading price for a global "normalized" price, yet you fail to use that same global approach to the market as a whole when the ICO China ban slammed the market, and here BCC is up...

Today is the 9th, the trading price is near what it was on the 6th, that is 3 days ago.  Both of which are ABOVE the price it was at at the time of the ICO ban, which if we note the whole market tanked as a whole some $30+ Billion...  

That you chose to minimize said poster, and nitpick what I'm saying says plenty...

carry on

Look, if you cant see current trends thats on you, you cant just pick two points, draw a line between them and call it a trend.

I dont think I ever denied that the ICO ban dropped the market, as did the Chinese exchange (fake) news but I fail to see the relevance to the current and/or long/mid term trend, you are too fixated on a momentary anomaly, something of which you cant get any meaningful data from. The simple fact is the price is indeed falling and the current trend is a downward one, whether you like it or not.

My personal expectation, if you care, is it will start to level out over the next 24 hours and continue its longer term sideways trend but I see no sign of an upward trend at the moment, anythings possible but based on the charts and not being aware of any major news in the next few days thats how I see it. If you think its on an up trend more power to you, I just dont see it at all.

[1715106623]

1715106623

[1715106623]

1715106623

[winding-coils]

Clean it up...   "you cant just pick two points, draw a line between them and call it a trend."   

you say this  "you are too fixated on a momentary anomaly, something of which you cant get any meaningful data from"  

and then offer this

"The simple fact is the price is indeed falling and the current trend is a downward one, whether you like it or not."  

BCC is still at .136, far above where it was trading even initially before the Chinese ICO ban...  you furthered and defended the post claiming it was falling and ridicule me (still) for offering that overall it is up relative to where it was BEFORE the point in time where the market as a whole fell...

I didn't call anything a trend, I said relative to... relative to... relative to... you defend a post making a generic claim "falling" and still defend it when there was no point of reference given.. I even asked for you to cite relative to what, falling from what?  But you continue..  while the price is still up

[BlackWidow]

You failed to call out anything with any valid information.  You failed to call out bek77 for his spinning of information, but if I had to guess it fuels your narrative so there's no surprise is there?  

The fact is that the price of trading of BCC at the time of China announcing ICO bans was lower relative to the price at the time that another poster (bek77) claimed the price was falling..

 BCC is still relatively up (from the time of that news)


*opposed  

All he said was "the price continues to fall", which in the current trend is true, if you want to talk about the longer trend then its pretty much sideways. You can pick arbitrary points to make it look any which way you like but I dont see the point in that.

Relative to what? Falling from what?  You must see some point as you selectively chose to ignore the trading price for a global "normalized" price, yet you fail to use that same global approach to the market as a whole when the ICO China ban slammed the market, and here BCC is up...

Today is the 9th, the trading price is near what it was on the 6th, that is 3 days ago.  Both of which are ABOVE the price it was at at the time of the ICO ban, which if we note the whole market tanked as a whole some $30+ Billion...  

That you chose to minimize said poster, and nitpick what I'm saying says plenty...

carry on

Look, if you cant see current trends thats on you, you cant just pick two points, draw a line between them and call it a trend.

I dont think I ever denied that the ICO ban dropped the market, as did the Chinese exchange (fake) news but I fail to see the relevance to the current and/or long/mid term trend, you are too fixated on a momentary anomaly, something of which you cant get any meaningful data from. The simple fact is the price is indeed falling and the current trend is a downward one, whether you like it or not.

My personal expectation, if you care, is it will start to level out over the next 24 hours and continue its longer term sideways trend but I see no sign of an upward trend at the moment, anythings possible but based on the charts and not being aware of any major news in the next few days thats how I see it. If you think its on an up trend more power to you, I just dont see it at all.

This is EXACTLY CORRECT. The no up part that is, its going down.

[winding-coils]

Another FUDDER claiming the price is down when BCC has made gains during the Chinese ICO ban whereas the market overall is down as a whole.

Way to hedge your bets guys, you're doing great.  

[winding-coils]

Nothing to say about this "shitty alt coin" giving Segwit a run for its money in profitability?
http://fork.lol/

No EDA ma!!  

You guys are PRAYING that BCC doesn't see a pump. I'm well hedged and win either way, this isn't religion to me. 

[BlackWidow]

Clean it up...   "you cant just pick two points, draw a line between them and call it a trend."  

you say this  "you are too fixated on a momentary anomaly, something of which you cant get any meaningful data from"  

and then offer this

"The simple fact is the price is indeed falling and the current trend is a downward one, whether you like it or not."  

BCC is still at .136, far above where it was trading even initially before the Chinese ICO ban...  you furthered and defended the post claiming it was falling and ridicule me (still) for offering that overall it is up relative to where it was BEFORE the point in time where the market as a whole fell...

I didn't call anything a trend, I said relative to... relative to... relative to... you defend a post making a generic claim "falling" and still defend it when there was no point of reference given.. I even asked for you to cite relative to what, falling from what?  But you continue..  while the price is still up

You are the one using a small space between two data points.

You are the one that keeps mentioning "SINCE CHINA, SINCE CHINA"

Yeah we all get the China news. We know

But that just happened.

You can not logically, step by step, using meaningful data, make an argument that it will go up.

Thats what is being said here. And its true. That is not up to us.

Just history, and math

[winding-coils]

Cool story bro, BCC is at .136       


It was not at this level (see, much lower) prior to the Chinese ban on ICOs...

Somehow you're failing to see that from this level (pre Chinese ban on ICOs) the price has gone up (today)

That's fine, you can ignore history and current events like I said earlier, you are a plague to this thread, you have no interest in anything relating to a crypto community and you only care to further your religious beliefs in some hijacked segwit alt.

[Grrizz]

Clean it up...   "you cant just pick two points, draw a line between them and call it a trend."   

you say this  "you are too fixated on a momentary anomaly, something of which you cant get any meaningful data from"  

and then offer this

"The simple fact is the price is indeed falling and the current trend is a downward one, whether you like it or not."  

BCC is still at .136, far above where it was trading even initially before the Chinese ICO ban...  you furthered and defended the post claiming it was falling and ridicule me (still) for offering that overall it is up relative to where it was BEFORE the point in time where the market as a whole fell...

I didn't call anything a trend, I said relative to... relative to... relative to... you defend a post making a generic claim "falling" and still defend it when there was no point of reference given.. I even asked for you to cite relative to what, falling from what?  But you continue..  while the price is still up

Look at a chart and figure it out, its not rocket science...

[winding-coils]

It's been said over and over...

The FUDDERS say BCC is falling...while the price is up, I am not the one who needs to look at the chart.

[winding-coils]

What is awesome is the attention that this thread gets every time one of the segwitters tries to skew the data.

BCC is not dead, it's not $200 or $300 or 50 sats or whatever that plague to the community claimed on their many prophetic tangents.

The mining profitability has been "trending" towards BCC's favor and the price has been "trending" up since being flat for nearly 2 weeks @~$300

Oh and we still have Bitkan to look forward to! 

[bones261]

Nothing to say about this "shitty alt coin" giving Segwit a run for its money in profitability?
http://fork.lol/

No EDA ma!!  

You guys are PRAYING that BCC doesn't see a pump. I'm well hedged and win either way, this isn't religion to me.  

I'd love to see BCC get a substantial pump, as well as the other vulture miners. Since my miners are obsolete, I have to wait for a substantial pump to make it worth renting hash. Please do pump, sky high. Us vulture miners are have been circling around, patiently waiting for quite some time. BTW, if you think most of the vulture miners are going to mine to HODL Bitcoin Cash, if and when the opportunity comes up, you are delusional.   Also, if you think that the vulture miners are going to stick around long after the profitability goes back down, you're delusional.

[winding-coils]

Let's first ask if BCC needed these "vulture miners" to stay afloat amidst all of the "it's falling" FUD?

Then let's ask ourselves "does winding-coils really base his premise on the idea that vulture miners will save this alt coin" because if you think I'm banking on "vulture miners" then either you have failed to have been paying attention (not likely as you just replied to me) or you are refusing to accept that you are hoping I am banking on these vulture miners and that you're hoping in some way that the "vulture miners" can do some damage to BCC.

You think riding the profit parity is by accident? And if not by coincidence, does that suggest one (or many collectively) has the power to manipulate in a way to hover around that.. hmm.

[winding-coils]

if you think that the vulture miners are going to stick around long after the profitability goes back down, you're delusional.

This assumes that BCC would become less profitable at some point after some substantial pump.
We may soon find that there is no choice in the matter, if there is no other coin to turn to for profit why would they leave BCC?

[bones261]

Let's first ask if BCC needed these "vulture miners" to stay afloat amidst all of the "it's falling" FUD?

Then let's ask ourselves "does winding-coils really base his premise on the idea that vulture miners will save this alt coin" because if you think I'm banking on "vulture miners" then either you have failed to have been paying attention (not likely as you just replied to me) or you are refusing to accept that you are hoping I am banking on these vulture miners and that you're hoping in some way that the "vulture miners" can do some damage to BCC.

You think riding the profit parity is by accident? And if not by coincidence, does that suggest one (or many collectively) has the power to manipulate in a way to hover around that.. hmm.

This coin needs to attract a more diverse crowd of devoted miners. Something it has failed to do. Sorry, but all one needs to do is go to a block explorer and find that a lion's share of the hash is from the magical mystery miner(s) controlling 1BgatB78WrFLdCgnPnBqiDcNFFA46jkPZe and 17Wk4GPKw9nZ9PbspzaxN3fv1L2m9NA9dg private keys at the moment. Neither of these addresses seem to be associated with a pubic pool, since you would expect at least some of these coins to be spent paying out miners. Neither address has "spent" coins. It is not very healthy for a network to be relying on only 2 miners having almost 2/3 of the hash rate.
And about the argument, "well BTC was centralized back in 2009 and 2010, when it first started;" that really isn't a good excuse. Very few knew about BTC back then, but plenty of people all well aware of Bitcoin Cash now. If they were not aware, you wouldn't have the problem of the vulture miners.
Quite frankly, the Bitcoin Cash developers could have solved this problem of not miner hoping by doing merged mining like Namecoin did. However, they went with the EDA. It's abundantly obvious they chose the EDA method to try and disrupt the hashrate of the other chain. But now they realized that when they did this, the vulture miners caused the blocks to fly by. This is not good in the long run since it hastens the date of the next halving.

[winding-coils]

I'm sure they're well aware that when the EDA kicked in that the miners who seek profit (which of them do not?) would switch chains, this isn't an oversight but implemented as designed and I think the straddling of the profit parity shows that it has been successful. For it to have not been a success would mean it would have fell flat, or failed to move up at all.

As for the needed devoted miners you speak of, well, I point to my previous post, they are devoted to what, to profits, and when there's a single coin that will deliver these profits this is where you will find their devotion allocated. Roger has alluded to this in many of his interviews, what is happening is what these guys have been laying out but the only ones to see its possibility are those remaining objective and not holding onto some digital coin like it's some deity.

[jokerlu]

Bitcoin cash, a second chance to invest.

[bones261]

I'm sure they're well aware that when the EDA kicked in that the miners who seek profit (which of them do not?) would switch chains, this isn't an oversight but implemented as designed and I think the straddling of the profit parity shows that it has been successful. For it to have not been a success would mean it would have fell flat, or failed to move up at all.

As for the needed devoted miners you speak of, well, I point to my previous post, they are devoted to what, to profits, and when there's a single coin that will deliver these profits this is where you will find their devotion allocated. Roger has alluded to this in many of his interviews, what is happening is what these guys have been laying out but the only ones to see its possibility are those remaining objective and not holding onto some digital coin like it's some deity.

The developers should have just went with merged mining. Then you would have plenty of miners who would mine this coin no matter what, since it will be all gravy. Also, the straddling of the profit parity is being controlled by the magical mystery miners and BTC.TOP. These three entities can adjust their hash at will to implement an EDA or not. This is just not very healthy network dynamics at all.

[winding-coils]

Who it's healthy for simply a matter of perspective.

[bones261]

Who it's healthy for simply a matter of perspective.

The two magical mystery miners could easily implement a double spend attack, if they wanted. We are all trusting that they will behave with everyone's best interest. With the coins the magical mystery miners now hold, they could devastate an exchange that got on their bad side with a double spend attack. I guess this is healthy if you happen to be one of the magical mystery miners.

[winding-coils]

Are high fees a part of this healthy network dynamic from which perspective you have declared the hash/capability of said mystery miners to be suspect? 

Do you support or have interest in low fees on the (shorter) SegWit chain?  For anyone, I would be curious to know your interest on high vs low fees.

Please disclose for all to see.