It seems that 600w, and me and others are largely criticizing the way that the term crypto or cryptocurrencies is used in order to suggest that there is some kind broad category that exists and bitcoin just happens to be one of them and some kind of vague misleading effort that does not really put bitcoin in the right context in comparison/contrast to various scams and shitcoins that are lumped into the same category.

So in the end, it does not really matter if you use the term crypto or crypto-currency(ies) if you are not clarifying bitcoin versus the various imitators, scams and wannabes.

600w seemed to explain the matter well-enough so there should be no real need to explain further or to quibble with his explanation unless you are mostly agreeing that he is correct and you just want to supplement his explanation in one way or another.  As long as any explanation ends up putting bitcoin on top and criticizing the others as largely crap, then you are largely heading in the right direction.  If you attempt to defend the vague and misleading use of the term without criticizing the various shitcoins and making sure that you clearly and unambigously put bitcoin on the top, then you might either be missing something or you are giving too much benefit of the doubt to various shitcoins.

Personally, I doubt that i go as far as 600w seems to do in seeming to absolutely and unambiguously call all non-bitcoin projects as scams and worthless, but I consider myself as not being too far behind him in terms of accepting that perspective... and I kind of think, whenever in doubt, start by calling them shitcoins first, before saying anything nice about them, and if you do need to say anything nice about any of the shitcoins, make sure that your seemingly nice comments are intertwined with making sure that you are not agreeing that they are anything but a shitcoin or a scam... even though they might have some short term pumpening and dumpening potentials.



I am not sure about your reference here, CT.  Cryptocurrencies did not really exist before bitcoin.. so bitcoin started out the matter, and then various shitcoins proliferated to attempt to create a use case for themselves or alternatively to prey upon the possibility that bitcoin might some day day or fall in its dominance of the category.. which has not happened, and the vast majority of coins (if not all of them) are just snake oils salesmen.. and probably the ONLY valid ones would be the ones that acknowledge king daddy bitcoin and do not attempt to try to suggest that they are better than bitcoin or equal or that they are addressing some supposed deficiencies in bitcoin.  So if they are attempting to build upon bitcoin without really creating their own currency and maybe just pegging to bitcoin, then perhaps those kinds of projects might be worthy of saying good things without necessarily denigrating them along the way.



As long as you denigrate shitcoins, probably no problem with using them in the short term..