[XMR] Monero Speculation

[medusa13]

..
I can't get butthurt I have nothing but dust. I'm pissed that those loans protect shorters and hurt the ecosystem.

please explain how they hurt the ecosystem  in your view

a healthy lending market does nothing but support the ecosystem, since it enables a variety if financial strategies and tools (e.g. hedging) for all market participants.

you seem confused really. protecting shorters? we make shorting possible in the first place. if they get rekt by doing so is not my decision.

[1715193842]

1715193842

[1715193842]

1715193842

[1715193842]

1715193842

[1715193842]

1715193842

[Hueristic]

..
I can't get butthurt I have nothing but dust. I'm pissed that those loans protect shorters and hurt the ecosystem.

please explain how they hurt the ecosystem  in your view

a healthy lending market does nothing but support the ecosystem, since it enables a variety if financial strategies and tools (e.g. hedging) for all market participants.

you seem confused really. protecting shorters? we make shorting possible in the first place. if they get rekt by doing so is not my decision.

It can be used to dump which shakes confidence and weak hands follow that trend, it hurts the coin. Most people don't check to see whats being lent when they are watching a dump and panicking. I understand your only motive is profit so whatever. If you really wanted to help liquidity you wold put those coins on other exchanges and set up some trading bots.

[TheKoziTwo]

..
I can't get butthurt I have nothing but dust. I'm pissed that those loans protect shorters and hurt the ecosystem.

please explain how they hurt the ecosystem  in your view

a healthy lending market does nothing but support the ecosystem, since it enables a variety if financial strategies and tools (e.g. hedging) for all market participants.

you seem confused really. protecting shorters? we make shorting possible in the first place. if they get rekt by doing so is not my decision.

+1

There's this common misconception about people selling (or worse: shorting) that they are hurting the coin. You'll notice that people who are bearish tend to get more hate directed towards them. It makes perfect sense, because if you hold and the price is going down it hurts. And who's causing the price to go down? Well obviously sellers/shorters. Shorters becomes an enemy to blame for ones own losses, an outlet for all the frustration that builds up during a long drawn out and bloody beartrend.

While it's easy to fall victim to this sort of thinking I believe this view is narrow minded and here's why:
Without opposing forces the price may go higher, but it will be on low volume and the crashes will be much deeper. In a sense the price becomes more artificial the less volume is involved and the less liquidity is available. Sellers/shorters provide a very important function in the market, that is: liquidity which prevents the price from going too high, and also liqudity that prevents the price from going too low (shorters must close their short, traders who sell buy back). These opposing forces work beautifully to stabilize a market and avoid even higher and lower spikes that we would have had without them. The more opposing forces in a market the more stable it becomes. Stability is GOOD for the coin, not bad.

Can we think of any example where there are no sellers and shorters? Yes. Zcash. There was almost zero supply as it launched and no way to properly short, and the consequence of that was a launching price that went beyond 2 million USD. The ATH has been set and we'll never see prices even remotely close. If there had been sufficient amount of sellers or shorters, this would not have happened, the price would have reflected reality better. I don't think it's heatlhy for any coin to have such raises like we've seen in zcash. And as we've just witnessed, without sellers/shorters, that's what you're gonna get.

[Hueristic]

..
I can't get butthurt I have nothing but dust. I'm pissed that those loans protect shorters and hurt the ecosystem.

please explain how they hurt the ecosystem  in your view

a healthy lending market does nothing but support the ecosystem, since it enables a variety if financial strategies and tools (e.g. hedging) for all market participants.

you seem confused really. protecting shorters? we make shorting possible in the first place. if they get rekt by doing so is not my decision.

+1

There's this common misconception about people selling (or worse: shorting) that they are hurting the coin. You'll notice that people who are bearish tend to get more hate directed towards them. It makes perfect sense, because if you hold and the price is going down it hurts. And who's causing the price to go down? Well obviously sellers/shorters. Shorters becomes an enemy to blame for ones own losses, an outlet for all the frustration that builds up during a long drawn out and bloody beartrend.

While it's easy to fall victim to this sort of thinking I believe this view is narrow minded and here's why:
Without opposing forces the price may go higher, but it will be on low volume and the crashes will be much deeper. In a sense the price becomes more artificial the less volume is involved and the less liquidity is available. Sellers/shorters provide a very important function in the market, that is: liquidity which prevents the price from going too high, and also liqudity that prevents the price from going too low (shorters must close their short, traders who sell buy back). These opposing forces work beautifully to stabilize a market and avoid even higher and lower spikes that we would have had without them. The more opposing forces in a market the more stable it becomes. Stability is GOOD for the coin, not bad.

Can we think of any example where there are no sellers and shorters? Yes. Zcash. There was almost zero supply as it launched and no way to properly short, and the consequence of that was a launching price that went beyond 2 million USD. The ATH has been set and we'll never see prices even remotely close. If there had been sufficient amount of sellers or shorters, this would not have happened, the price would have reflected reality better. I don't think it's heatlhy for any coin to have such raises like we've seen in zcash. And as we've just witnessed, without sellers/shorters, that's what you're gonna get.

I added this while you were posting.

If you really wanted to help liquidity you wold put those coins on other exchanges and set up some trading bots.

[TheKoziTwo]

I added this while you were posting.

If you really wanted to help liquidity you wold put those coins on other exchanges and set up some trading bots.

While I encourage that as well, especially putting some coins up for sale at bitsquare the decentralized exchange, I don't think there's really any kind of liqudity that is better than the other. They serve different functions, and both are important. In fact, a shorter HAS to buy back, a seller doesn't have to buy back. With a short you are thus guaranteed the liquidity both ways.

[phoenix rises]

@ TheKoziTwo - great explanation of why the ability to short is essential to price discovery  

In other news, this should be fun to watch ...

https://coin.dance/blocks

ViaBTC up from 7.5% to 10.43% and Bitcoin.com up from 2.5% to 4.86% in last 24 hours. That's >15% explicity against Segwit and for a hard fork before signalling even begins ...

Adaptive blocksizes anyone ??  

[Hueristic]

I added this while you were posting.

If you really wanted to help liquidity you wold put those coins on other exchanges and set up some trading bots.

While I encourage that as well, especially putting some coins up for sale at bitsquare the decentralized exchange, I don't think there's really any kind of liqudity that is better than the other. They serve different functions, and both are important. In fact, a shorter HAS to buy back, a seller doesn't have to buy back. With a short you are thus guaranteed the liquidity both ways.

I think bitsquare needs to change it's name, it's to easily confused with bifinex. To get on something like Kraken or Coinbase we need a more diversified trading eco sytem then just polo and the droppings on Bittrex. If I had the bankroll I'd be doing that, as I think that will help this coin grow much faster than a GUI or aNY OF THE OTHER additions on the roadmap sans mutlisig. Damn laptop, always hitting caps lock instead of "a".

Not to mention anyone interested in increasing the worth of their coins should be doing everything they can to get on Large USD conversion exchanges rather than making peanuts lending that help suppress the price. I mean really how long do you whales need to accumulate, how rich do you have to get before you consider enough is enough and open this project up. We are not idiots here and sometimes it seems the whales treat us as such because we are not in their category.

[TrueCryptonaire]

I added this while you were posting.

If you really wanted to help liquidity you wold put those coins on other exchanges and set up some trading bots.

While I encourage that as well, especially putting some coins up for sale at bitsquare the decentralized exchange, I don't think there's really any kind of liqudity that is better than the other. They serve different functions, and both are important. In fact, a shorter HAS to buy back, a seller doesn't have to buy back. With a short you are thus guaranteed the liquidity both ways.

It doesn't make much difference if the seller is directly person A or person B who sells the coin's of A and is obligated to rebuy the initial amount + interests.

[medusa13]

It can be used to dump which shakes confidence and weak hands follow that trend, it hurts the coin. Most people don't check to see whats being lent when they are watching a dump and panicking. I understand your only motive is profit so whatever. If you really wanted to help liquidity you wold put those coins on other exchanges and set up some trading bots.

its you who assumes this is the only market im providing liquidity and im not running "some trading bots", not me saying it.

its those bots you recommend who extract money from markets by the way, not me.

also my motive is not profit, but reasonable liquidity and price stability. if you cant see how they are related to each other besides being registered on this forum for years, me explaining it probably wont help either.


besides that, you say you only hold dust ?i clearly dont. what are you doing to help the ecosystem besides attacking me? the millions of $$ trading volume each day and the newly atracted daytraders may leave the impression we are doing a pretty good job, dont you think ?

[phoenix rises]

I added this while you were posting.

If you really wanted to help liquidity you wold put those coins on other exchanges and set up some trading bots.

While I encourage that as well, especially putting some coins up for sale at bitsquare the decentralized exchange, I don't think there's really any kind of liqudity that is better than the other. They serve different functions, and both are important. In fact, a shorter HAS to buy back, a seller doesn't have to buy back. With a short you are thus guaranteed the liquidity both ways.

It doesn't make much difference if the seller is directly person A or person B who sells the coin's of A and is obligated to rebuy the initial amount + interests.

@ TC ...  I disagree, for the reasons you underlined (and I just bolded )  ... B has to buy back to repay A at some point, creating buying pressure somewhere down the line. A, by lending out his coins to B to short is implicitly showing no desire to sell at that price. If A were to sell, they may or may not buy back in. The immediate effect is the more or less the same, but the longer term effects have the potential to be significantly different.

[pa]

Serious question: How do those of you who support the Monero project, i.e. want it to succeed, justify selling moneroj at this embryonic stage of the ecosystem's development? Doesn't selling moneroj weaken the Monero project by demoralizing and disincentivizing the entire ecosystem?

I'm not judging anyone here, just curious how traders who are also supporters of the Monero project (and not just profiteers) think. I'm a hodler by temperament.

[smoothie]

..
I can't get butthurt I have nothing but dust. I'm pissed that those loans protect shorters and hurt the ecosystem.

please explain how they hurt the ecosystem  in your view

a healthy lending market does nothing but support the ecosystem, since it enables a variety if financial strategies and tools (e.g. hedging) for all market participants.

you seem confused really. protecting shorters? we make shorting possible in the first place. if they get rekt by doing so is not my decision.

It can be used to dump which shakes confidence and weak hands follow that trend, it hurts the coin. Most people don't check to see whats being lent when they are watching a dump and panicking. I understand your only motive is profit so whatever. If you really wanted to help liquidity you wold put those coins on other exchanges and set up some trading bots.

You have to look at it from both sides.

Shorters are also in a sense providing liquidity to buyers.

Allowing more participants is a good thing even if it goes against your bias in the markets.

[TrueCryptonaire]

I added this while you were posting.

If you really wanted to help liquidity you wold put those coins on other exchanges and set up some trading bots.

While I encourage that as well, especially putting some coins up for sale at bitsquare the decentralized exchange, I don't think there's really any kind of liqudity that is better than the other. They serve different functions, and both are important. In fact, a shorter HAS to buy back, a seller doesn't have to buy back. With a short you are thus guaranteed the liquidity both ways.

It doesn't make much difference if the seller is directly person A or person B who sells the coin's of A and is obligated to rebuy the initial amount + interests.

@ TC ...  I disagree, for the reasons you underlined (and I just bolded )  ... B has to buy back to repay A at some point, creating buying pressure somewhere down the line. A, by lending out his coins to B to short is implicitly showing no desire to sell at that price. If A were to sell, they may or may not buy back in. The immediate effect is the more or less the same, but the longer term effects have the potential to be significantly different.

I think we agree here.

Indeed it is more alarming if A just dumps the coins because he may not want to buy back anymore, not even at lower price.
Therefore, the shorters might play important role in the price appreciation especially if the interest rates are high (more than the rate of inflation).

[kurious]

..
I can't get butthurt I have nothing but dust. I'm pissed that those loans protect shorters and hurt the ecosystem.

please explain how they hurt the ecosystem  in your view

a healthy lending market does nothing but support the ecosystem, since it enables a variety if financial strategies and tools (e.g. hedging) for all market participants.

you seem confused really. protecting shorters? we make shorting possible in the first place. if they get rekt by doing so is not my decision.

+1

There's this common misconception about people selling (or worse: shorting) that they are hurting the coin. You'll notice that people who are bearish tend to get more hate directed towards them. It makes perfect sense, because if you hold and the price is going down it hurts. And who's causing the price to go down? Well obviously sellers/shorters. Shorters becomes an enemy to blame for ones own losses, an outlet for all the frustration that builds up during a long drawn out and bloody beartrend.

While it's easy to fall victim to this sort of thinking I believe this view is narrow minded and here's why:
Without opposing forces the price may go higher, but it will be on low volume and the crashes will be much deeper. In a sense the price becomes more artificial the less volume is involved and the less liquidity is available. Sellers/shorters provide a very important function in the market, that is: liquidity which prevents the price from going too high, and also liqudity that prevents the price from going too low (shorters must close their short, traders who sell buy back). These opposing forces work beautifully to stabilize a market and avoid even higher and lower spikes that we would have had without them. The more opposing forces in a market the more stable it becomes. Stability is GOOD for the coin, not bad.

Can we think of any example where there are no sellers and shorters? Yes. Zcash. There was almost zero supply as it launched and no way to properly short, and the consequence of that was a launching price that went beyond 2 million USD. The ATH has been set and we'll never see prices even remotely close. If there had been sufficient amount of sellers or shorters, this would not have happened, the price would have reflected reality better. I don't think it's heatlhy for any coin to have such raises like we've seen in zcash. And as we've just witnessed, without sellers/shorters, that's what you're gonna get.

+1

The market is finding price properly.  Do we want to be zcash (no possibility to short)?

That which does not kill me, makes me strong...

[iCEBREAKER]

Serious question: How do those of you who support the Monero project, i.e. want it to succeed, justify selling moneroj at this embryonic stage of the ecosystem's development? Doesn't selling moneroj weaken the Monero project by demoralizing and disincentivizing the entire ecosystem?

I'm not judging anyone here, just curious how traders who are also supporters of the Monero project (and not just profiteers) think. I'm a hodler by temperament.

Shorters (and their lenders) help Monero by

1)  Aiding stability and price discovery by providing liquidity, thus absorbing volatility and smoothing out spikes/dips, as KoziTwo explained in detail

2)  Encouraging wider distribution by filling bids when someone wants to borrow and dump, which aids Network Effect (Nielsen)

3)  Causing economic illiterates ("zomg I hate teh nasty shorters and hope tey get h4x0rd1!1!!") to self identify

4)  Increasing profits of the facilitating exchange; IE Polo benefits not only from XMR activity but also the ETH, etc. volume attracted as well, which encourages more exchange adaption via profit motive (you know the other exchanges are mad/jealous Polo is eating 41% of their ETH lunch while they fight over the leftovers)

[pa]

Serious question: How do those of you who support the Monero project, i.e. want it to succeed, justify selling moneroj at this embryonic stage of the ecosystem's development? Doesn't selling moneroj weaken the Monero project by demoralizing and disincentivizing the entire ecosystem?

I'm not judging anyone here, just curious how traders who are also supporters of the Monero project (and not just profiteers) think. I'm a hodler by temperament.

Shorters (and their lenders) help Monero by

1)  Aiding stability and price discovery by providing liquidity, thus absorbing volatility and smoothing out spikes/dips, as KoziTwo explained in detail

2)  Encouraging wider distribution by filling bids when someone wants to borrow and dump, which aids Network Effect (Nielsen)

3)  Causing economic illiterates ("zomg I hate teh nasty shorters and hope tey get h4x0rd1!1!!") to self identify

4)  Increasing profits of the facilitating exchange; IE Polo benefits not only from XMR activity but also the ETH, etc. volume attracted as well, which encourages more exchange adaption via profit motive (you know the other exchanges are mad/jealous Polo is eating 41% of their ETH lunch while they fight over the leftovers)

I agree with all of that, and also KoziTwo's explanation, but what about simply selling with no intention of buying back, for example following Risto's Simple Saving System and selling X% of one's holdings after every Y-fold increase in price. That sounds sensible from a personal perspective, but wouldn't it be harmful to the project if all of the hodlers did that? Am I the only one who feels guilty when they sell moneroj? Maybe my error is thinking of Monero as a fragile thing that needs protecting. . .

[kurious]

Serious question: How do those of you who support the Monero project, i.e. want it to succeed, justify selling moneroj at this embryonic stage of the ecosystem's development? Doesn't selling moneroj weaken the Monero project by demoralizing and disincentivizing the entire ecosystem?

I'm not judging anyone here, just curious how traders who are also supporters of the Monero project (and not just profiteers) think. I'm a hodler by temperament.

Shorters (and their lenders) help Monero by

1)  Aiding stability and price discovery by providing liquidity, thus absorbing volatility and smoothing out spikes/dips, as KoziTwo explained in detail

2)  Encouraging wider distribution by filling bids when someone wants to borrow and dump, which aids Network Effect (Nielsen)

3)  Causing economic illiterates ("zomg I hate teh nasty shorters and hope tey get h4x0rd1!1!!") to self identify

4)  Increasing profits of the facilitating exchange; IE Polo benefits not only from XMR activity but also the ETH, etc. volume attracted as well, which encourages more exchange adaption via profit motive (you know the other exchanges are mad/jealous Polo is eating 41% of their ETH lunch while they fight over the leftovers)

I agree with all of that, and also KoziTwo's explanation, but what about simply selling with no intention of buying back, for example following Risto's Simple Saving System and selling X% of one's holdings after every Y-fold increase in price. That sounds sensible from a personal perspective, but wouldn't it be harmful to the project if all of the hodlers did that? Am I the only one who feels guilty when they sell moneroj? Maybe my error is thinking of Monero as a fragile thing that needs protecting. . .

Don't worry - you're in the right place.  But XMR is anti-fragile, it can be shorted, therefore it only survives because it is good enough that people want to buy it.

This testing makes it strong and real.

It is unlike any other cryptocoin.

And it is growing in stature, just as Bitcoin did.

Let them sell and if the price is right we will buy.

[ozkraut]

Serious question: How do those of you who support the Monero project, i.e. want it to succeed, justify selling moneroj at this embryonic stage of the ecosystem's development? Doesn't selling moneroj weaken the Monero project by demoralizing and disincentivizing the entire ecosystem?

I'm not judging anyone here, just curious how traders who are also supporters of the Monero project (and not just profiteers) think. I'm a hodler by temperament.

Shorters (and their lenders) help Monero by

1)  Aiding stability and price discovery by providing liquidity, thus absorbing volatility and smoothing out spikes/dips, as KoziTwo explained in detail

2)  Encouraging wider distribution by filling bids when someone wants to borrow and dump, which aids Network Effect (Nielsen)

3)  Causing economic illiterates ("zomg I hate teh nasty shorters and hope tey get h4x0rd1!1!!") to self identify

4)  Increasing profits of the facilitating exchange; IE Polo benefits not only from XMR activity but also the ETH, etc. volume attracted as well, which encourages more exchange adaption via profit motive (you know the other exchanges are mad/jealous Polo is eating 41% of their ETH lunch while they fight over the leftovers)

I agree with all of that, and also KoziTwo's explanation, but what about simply selling with no intention of buying back, for example following Risto's Simple Saving System and selling X% of one's holdings after every Y-fold increase in price. That sounds sensible from a personal perspective, but wouldn't it be harmful to the project if all of the hodlers did that? Am I the only one who feels guilty when they sell moneroj? Maybe my error is thinking of Monero as a fragile thing that needs protecting. . .

Don't worry - you're in the right place.  But XMR is anti-fragile, it can be shorted, therefore it only survives because it is good enough that people want to buy it.

This testing makes it strong and real.

It is unlike any other cryptocoin.

And it is growing in stature, just as Bitcoin did.

Let them sell and if the price is right we will buy.

This.

The inclusion in margin markets set the 'real' projects apart from the myriad of pretenders. It shows trust in the future viability and it is a strength not a weakness.

lol to point 3)  "Causing economic illiterates ("zomg I hate teh nasty shorters and hope tey get h4x0rd1!1!!") to self identify " (;-)

[saddambitcoin]

Serious question: How do those of you who support the Monero project, i.e. want it to succeed, justify selling moneroj at this embryonic stage of the ecosystem's development? Doesn't selling moneroj weaken the Monero project by demoralizing and disincentivizing the entire ecosystem?

I'm not judging anyone here, just curious how traders who are also supporters of the Monero project (and not just profiteers) think. I'm a hodler by temperament.

I don't sell Monero, I spend it. Of course I have a holding stash and a spending stash, you might say. It makes me feel good to do at least one Monero transaction per day. Buying, selling, just keep the funds moving! Using Monero is what makes the economy grow. It's fantastic.

[bbc.reporter]

Zcash + syscoin together.. real decentralized marketplace with real anon... how will xmr react? Stay tuned...

Zcash and Syscoin together will be nothing to Monero fully accepted and actually widely used in the darknet market as second currency. Do not underestimate the amount of business that is going on in the darknet. That is a potential multi billion market because it is growing at much faster pace than before. If the black market participants learn about crypto and take their business and wares online thru the darknet, we could witness a boom in online markets outside of regulation with bitcoin and XMR already waiting in the middle.