Quote from: cAPSLOCK on November 02, 2021, 05:28:32 PM

I have been waiting a LONG time to begin to see this start happening. Since 2014 in fact.

1. We are on the cusp of a much deeper interest in Monero from the wider cypherpunk community.
2. We are possibly also going to be regaining the community focus as Monero as a COMPLIMENT to bitcoin rather than a competitor.

This recording of a Twitter Spaces hosted by Guns N' Bitcoins after they announced the intent to start to accept Monero (for obvious reasons) is worth a listen.

Behold the beginning of the beginning...

https://twitter.com/sethforprivacy/status/1455510248349962255?s=20

-edit avoiding multiple posts in a row for our mods-

So it gets juicy at about minute 52. A listener states they do not understand why someone would be 100% Monero and reject bitcoin. And another listener gave a good reason, and one that I think is fairly new-ish in the Monero community. The answer was: Bitcoin has been co-opted.

Now. I believe that person believes that. Earlier in the talk someone brought up Blockstream and how they have programmed us to believe in small blocks etc. Maybe the same person.

THIS is what I mean when I say the Monero community is using BCASH arguments now.

I am also aware that people in this thread probably agree with the assertion that is being made there. But I think this is a really bad line. Because there is a better way to bring people INTO an understanding of Monero without forcing them into an adversarial position with Bitcoin.

Let's use Michael Saylor as an example. Anyone notice how he's often said he does not think Bitcoin challenges the US dollar? If you have listened to him for more than 45 seconds you know he is smart enough to get that Bitcoin ABSOLUTELY challenges all fiat currencies. But he is focusing on the "better at being gold than gold" angle.

His reasons are simple, in my humble opinion. It's what Bitcoin needs to do FIRST. And it's ALL bitcoin needs to do FIRST. Because once it has basically replaced gold (not a trivial boss-fight in itself) then becoming a worldwide transactional currency is something that CANNOT be stopped.

But if Saylor was prancing around talking about how it is going to "destroy the dollar" then he'd be painting a target on it. Not only is the approach sensible it's honest. Because again, that is all Bitcoin needs to do right now. Become the premium store of wealth.

Likewise Monero does not need to replace Bitcoin. It just needs to COMPLIMENT IT. And for those who truly believe Bitcoin has been co-opted? Well don't use Bitcoin then, for sure. But it will be in your best interest to work in a way that will make monero attractive to as many people as possible. And you can coexist with the Bitcoin community and disagree with them. Or even believe that Monero should and/or WILL replace Bitcoin in the end.

It is like the famous Hayek quote:

Quote

don't believe we shall ever have a good money again before we take the thing out of the hands of government, we can't take it violently out of the hands of govt, all we can do is by some sly roundabout way introduce something that they can't stop

We don't need to replace Bitcoin. We just need to keep pointing out that there are some things Monero does that Bitcoin not only does not... but CANNOT.

My final point. This street works both ways. There are tremendous advantages to an open transparent blockchain. Bitcoin is better at certain things. And it will eat all the other shitcoins features over time. But one thing it can NEVER do is have an obfuscated base layer.

Selah.

There are two problems with this suggestions.

First, I agree from a marketing perspective Saylor is clever in his bitcoin promotion. I disagree that Saylor's approach is honest. In the hours and hours of interviews I've listened to, his marketing relies on telling half truths and misdirection to curry favor with the fiat maximalists. It would be the same for Monero with bitcoin maximalists. We would do well from a marketing perspective to adopt a similar approach with Bitcoiners, but it would rely on some degree of deception. I agree this is probably the optimal approach, but it will be difficult getting a decentralized community of enthusiasts to get onboard with this tactic. It works in Bitcoin because Saylor has such an out sized influence on the discourse. From what I can tell, Microstrategy has pivoted to from business analytics to full time bitcoin marketing.

Second, have you engaged with bitcoin maximalists? Your avatar is from the WO circle jerk post, so I know the answer. I've tried to get friends and family interested in bitcoin. One look at bitcoin twitter and they universally recoil in horror. The gross bitcoin culture has been my biggest hurdle. Maybe you don't see it from the inside, but the levels religious cult like behaviour are off the charts including blind faith, heresy, and persecution of the infidels. The bitcoin inquisition is real. The pseudo macho personas are gross (shitcoins, carnivore diets, have fun staying poor, etc). Facts or logic have no impact on their beliefs. It's a big ask to suggest privacy enthusiasts try to engage in that pseudo religious cesspool.