Quote from: Qartada on May 09, 2017, 01:09:22 PM

Quote from: pawel7777 on May 09, 2017, 12:57:09 PM

Can you provide any rationale for the 3%? Or is the number just taken out of nowhere?

Why not 1%, 5%, 10% or even 20%?

And I must be missing a point, how would the rule prevent the Dallas bitcoinaire from selling 97% of his stash at ridiculously low price? He would still feel regret, not to mention that (according to the rule) he vouched to hold the remaining 3% forever, so won't be ever taking any advantage of the price rise, unless he decides not to follow the rule.

For this specific example, the "sell half each time the price doubles" (or variation of it) seems way more appropriate.

While that specific percentage is meaningless, it is repeatable.

For example, you have 1000 Bitcoin and the price is $1. You sell 970 of it, and five years later the price is $1000. You sell 29.1 of it, and five years later the price is a million (much less likely Wink

).

No real reason to only hold 3% though. With any stock I would only sell a small part at a time.

That would make a bit more sense, but that's not what the linked article is saying at all. Instead, we got this:

Quote

He wont try to out-think himself here with these 3 Bitcoins; he will simply keep them forever in a combination of wallets. The other 97, he may sell, then buy back later, or use, but his 3 Bitcoins will never be touched.

So clearly, the author's intention was not for the rule to be repeatable.