I skimmed the thread but didn't find the argument. Can you point me to it or rephrase it?
He was talking about something kind of off-topic because everything listed in the original post has/is it's own native currency:
Somewhat, except to the extent that some of the use cases of the coins listed there seem to revolve primarily around off-chain assets. A blockchain that relies on that for most of its value is probably doomed. Merely "having" a native currency isn't enough if the native currency is only of incidental significance.
I don't know to what extent this applies to the coins listed in the OP. It seems some of that will have to play out in the market and while we might have opinions on how that will occur, most (if not all) of those opinions will probably be wrong.
which coin uses offchain assets?
Nxt as presently used would be one example (included within OP under PoS). As I understand it (and correct me if I'm wrong), most of the value is presently accounted for via the asset exchange (as opposed to the the native currency being a store of value or used transactionally)
Bitshares and Ethereum are both "platforms" to some extent, which means whether they are relying on offchain assets for most of their value is more of a practical question that will have to play out over time.
These assets on NXT dec. exchange are traded on chain...
Yes I understand that. What I mean is that the
value is off-chain. If you have some venture that issues shares on Nxt, you can move those shares to another platform without any effect on the underlying venture.
In order for a chain to have value it has to be the chain itself that is valued, not claims on external assets that happen (today) to be traded on that chain. At least to a large extent; being used as a platform does give the chain itself some value, but it is a tiny fraction of the asset value.