A Digital Record of All the Bitcoin Haters - Do It for the Lulz

[rat]

Where did all the haters go?


The academics. The "experts." The economists. The mainstream media talking heads. Your friends. The asshole next door.

Where did they go? I don't hear them now. Are they deleting their Youtube vids? Their blogs? Their childish misinformed tweets and posts?


It would be nice to gather a digital collection of all the circus clowns that strove so hard to misinform, and flat out lie about - The Coin.


Not because it would be a nice fuck you to the establishment.

But, because it would be a historical lesson to the masses. A lesson in trust.


Never believe what they tell you.  



Let the links begin.  

[1714897065]

1714897065

[1714897065]

1714897065

[1714897065]

1714897065

[1714897065]

1714897065

[1714897065]

1714897065

[1714897065]

1714897065

[runam0k]

FT Alphaville (online blog of the Financial Times in the UK) - http://ftalphaville.ft.com/tag/bitcoinmania/ - in particular, Izabella Kaminska, an economics grad who insists bitcoin is "massively flawed".

[kireinaha]

And we`ll order them to all wear yellow patches on their clothing so we can easily identify them as they walk down the street. How dare they exercise their freedom and express their personal opinions in the public forum!

[dalcebolus]

And we`ll order them to all wear yellow patches on their clothing so we can easily identify them as they walk down the street. How dare they exercise their freedom and express their personal opinions in the public forum!

Well, public opinions are that: public. And that means they can be publicly poo poo'ed. If I write something stupid then people are going to laugh at me. And then, if what I wrote ended up being not so stupid it's me the one who's going to have the last laugh.

What's wrong about that?

[kireinaha]

And we`ll order them to all wear yellow patches on their clothing so we can easily identify them as they walk down the street. How dare they exercise their freedom and express their personal opinions in the public forum!

Well, public opinions are that: public. And that means they can be publicly poo poo'ed. If I write something stupid then people are going to laugh at me. And then, if what I wrote ended up being not so stupid it's me the one who's going to have the last laugh.

What's wrong about that?

I strongly disagree with this attitude of `exposing` and shaming the people we disagree with. I prefer to live in a free society where people are allowed to voice their opinions without fear of retribution. Naming and shaming writers and economists who you disagree with does nothing to advance bitcoin`s agenda and puts a bad mark on the community.

[dalcebolus]

I strongly disagree with this attitude of `exposing` and shaming the people we disagree with. I prefer to live in a free society where people are allowed to voice their opinions without fear of retribution. Naming and shaming writers and economists who you disagree with does nothing to advance bitcoin`s agenda and puts a bad mark on the community.

Well, how free is the society I live in if I'm not allowed to list people's opinions and point the flaws (according to my limited judgement, of course) in them? Why can't they respond in the same way?

If I can't do that then free society that ain't.

[kireinaha]

Well, how free is the society I live in if I'm not allowed to list people's opinions and point the flaws (according to my limited judgement, of course) in them? Why can't they respond in the same way?

If I can't do that then free society that ain't.

There`s nothing wrong with referencing a writer`s opinion and succinctly posting a retort, detailing what you feel is wrong with his or her logic and your personal opinion on the matter. On the other hand, the OP has started a thread with the intent of shaming these writers, and from prior threads I`ve seen how this unfolds, with posting photos and other personal details -- ie. for the lulz -- of these people, followed by personal attacks. This is counter productive and the actions of angry loners who have nothing to add to bitcoin. This is not a positive message to send out.

Again, if you have a problem with the writers` articles, I encourage you to respond, but do so in a mature manner without calling people `idiots` or `dumb bitches` and the like. I have absolutely no problem with that.

[dalcebolus]

...
OP has started a thread with the intent of shaming these writers,

Well, some of them should really be ashamed of what they wrote .

and from prior threads I`ve seen how this unfolds, with posting photos and other personal details -- ie. for the lulz -- of these people, followed by personal attacks.

Nowhere in what OP wrote I read anything about posting personal details or specifically about posting photos. Anyway, I wouldn't have any problem if I see a photo of the writer to be 'shamed' next to what he/she wrote, provided that the photo in question was already public to begin with.

And if a particular economist/analyst/whatever is a shill or a crook then why wouldn't I feel outraged and be allowed to call it to his/her face? There is nothing wrong with feeling outrage. In any case, I would argue that the opposite is wrong.

This is counter productive and the actions of angry loners who have nothing to add to bitcoin. This is not a positive message to send out.

Bitcoin is not _one group_ with _one voice_. The sooner 'outside folk' understand that, the better. There is no 'bitcoin message' to be sent. Who gets to decide what's positive or not? I say lets read everything and decide for ourselves what is positive and what isn't.

Let the 'list' OP proposes stand (or fall) on its own merits. I specially like this part:

Not because it would be a nice fuck you to the establishment.
But, because it would be a historical lesson to the masses. A lesson in trust.
Never believe what they tell you.   

[LiteCoinGuy]

there is truly a mind-shift going on...

[Johnny Bitcoinseed]

Perhaps they are actually doing some good, acting as a kind of brake against irrational exuberance.  Eventually they, too, will have to admit the true value of bitcoin to the world.

Maybe many of you here were not old enough to appreciate the Internet when it first started taking off during the 1990's - the naysayers and doubters who said the Internet was full of drugs, porn, and scammers and was a scourge on society.  They said they themselves would never use the Internet because they got all their information from libraries and newspapers and magazines and could purchase anything they wanted from big box stores.

I remember when digital cameras were first available to the general public in the late 1990's.  The old hand photography professionals laughed and said they would never use digital cameras - just a toy.  Are they laughing now?  Of course not - they are using them!

In my over 50 years of life I have seen a number of disruptive technologies start slowly at first and then suddenly hit a critical mass that takes out the entrenched Old School way of thinking and doing.  Each in their turn at first laughed at, ridiculed, and even feared the new usurper.  Each in turn were finally adopted by nearly everyone.

After the fact, do these people ever admit they were wrong?  Not likely.  It is said after the fall of the Third Reich after World War II you were hard pressed to find even one German who claimed to have supported Adolph Hitler!  Mark my words, one day, you will be hard pressed to find one person who admits to having had been against Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies - instead most will claim they were supporters all along!

The way I see it, this is a disruptive technology that can pay off handsomely for the early adopters.  And believe me when I say this is still the early adoption phase.  This is like the Internet of 1998.  Digital cameras in 1999. But this is the power of money, of finance - even just owning one or two bitcoins could change your life.

[Rez]

If it's a public statement made by a journalist or commentator in a publication? I think it's okay to point and be Nelson.

If it's a blog entry by a private individual? Not so much.

[steeev]

' Do It for the Lulz '

it's only a laff... maybe people should be reminded of their sense of humour...

and it's ok cos some of it's funny stuff they're saying...

[Coinseeker]

Just because Bitcoin has ballooned to $850+ on pure speculation, does not mean Bitcoin is a success.  When Bitcoin is as ubiquitous as USD, then you may be able to say they were wrong.  As of now, the jury is still out because speculative bubbles do not prove the experiment has worked.  It only proves there are a bunch of risk takers, me included, who don't mind high risk investments.  There is a looong way to go before claiming victory.  This thread reminds me of Bush standing on an aircraft carrier with a banner in the backdrop saying, "Mission Accomplished".  We all know what a fail that was.   

[BittBurger]

I strongly disagree with this attitude of `exposing` and shaming the people we disagree with. I prefer to live in a free society where people are allowed to voice their opinions without fear of retribution. Naming and shaming writers and economists who you disagree with does nothing to advance bitcoin`s agenda and puts a bad mark on the community.

Of course you say this, because you have been one of the biggest anti-bitcoin posters on here.
Here's how my morality goes when it comes to talking shit:
If the person was a *dick* about it, then I retain the right to rub his face in it later.
They've all been arrogant, twattish, cum stains about it.   100% of them. 
They've mocked, belittled, and acted like we are fools.
Therefore I will refrain from handling the 'I told you so' phase with any modicum of respect.

[kireinaha]

I strongly disagree with this attitude of `exposing` and shaming the people we disagree with. I prefer to live in a free society where people are allowed to voice their opinions without fear of retribution. Naming and shaming writers and economists who you disagree with does nothing to advance bitcoin`s agenda and puts a bad mark on the community.

Of course you say this, because you have been one of the biggest anti-bitcoin posters on here.
Here's how my morality goes when it comes to talking shit:
If the person was a *dick* about it, then I retain the right to rub his face in it later.
They've all been arrogant, twattish, cum stains about it.   100% of them.  
They've mocked, belittled, and acted like we are fools.
Therefore I will refrain from handling the 'I told you so' phase with any modicum of respect.

That`s not really true; it doesn`t all need to boil down to either A) You`re for bitcoin or B) You`re against bitcoin.
I don`t see myself as anti-bitcoin at all, though apparently you and other posters may prefer to see it that way. I personally don`t care if bitcoin succeeds or not, I see it as an interesting experiment, and if it succeeds, I`ll make some $$ out of it, but otherwise, no big deal. I guess it`s easier for people to file the opinions of others as either the `A or B` option above, and maybe this is why I keep hearing about all the `cum stain` writers `talking shit` about bitcoin, etc. I don`t see it that way, and I read anything and everything I get my hands on about bitcoin. The worst I`ve seen is writers speculating that bitcoin is a classic mania, bubble, or whatever and that bitcoin supporters are zealous, but I think this thread pretty much verifies those latter assessments  

[btcapparel]

A big F U to all my friends and colleagues who laughed at me for getting into Bitcoin and are now calling me asking me to buy them coins!!

[niothor]

And you still wonder why not?