Quote from: JayJuanGee on June 20, 2022, 03:48:53 PM

Quote from: Majormax on June 19, 2022, 06:10:00 PM

Quote from: death_wish on June 19, 2022, 09:44:44 AM

Quote from: somac. on June 19, 2022, 09:12:31 AM

Quote from: ImThour on June 19, 2022, 09:06:14 AM

The amount of time we are taking on these levels which are below 200 MA is what scares the shit out of me.

+1 to that. But to be fair it is a weekend. Which is why they dumped in the first place.

We were already in a channel more or less under 200 WMA, between about that and ~10% below. IMO, it had been doing that for long enough to be teetering on borderline breakage. I had been hoping for a scenario like August–September 2015—scraping along just below/just above for a month, then recovering. At this point, since we crashed even below the previous cycle top (even in nominal dollars, never mind real value!), I think that 200 WMA is quite dead. Not “Bitcoin is dead”: Excessive reliance on a technical indicator is dead.

Gold had a two-decade extreme bear market. Anyone who bought gold at the wrong time had to wait an awful lot longer than four years to be not underwater. I also think that was a politically motivated economic attack, though I don’t want to get into off-topic discussion here that will derail into other matters. (I have mentioned this in some prior post, a few weeks ago... Something about gold-producing countries under international sanctions.)

Only fools declared gold dead. Smart people bought gold as low as ~$260, not so very long ago.

If we can escape from erroneous thinking about Bitcoin as “like a stock”, and really start treating it as digital gold, then there is ample precedent for shrugging off much worse crashes and bear markets than I now anticipate. As bad as this one is. Even if we are still nowhere near the bottom—maybe; maybe not; I am realistically pessimistic, but not prepared to make a call either way.

Quote from: ImThour on June 19, 2022, 09:06:14 AM

The amount of time we are taking on these levels which are below 200 WMA is what scares the shit out of me.

Quote from: ImThour’s Personal Text

Low IQ Finds TA = Astrology.

FTFY. As an inveterate pedant, I could not resist. Tongue

The previous cycle high was the *last* piece of TA that BTC chart had not violated previously. ... It was an almost religious symbol to some ppl.

Now that violation has happened, individuals have to make their decision... either say:

1. ' this indicates some serious imminent unknown, so BTC is broken in some way'

or 2. ' No form of TA applies anymore, so HODL as an act of pure faith'

Gold historical comparison is a helpful justification for (2), which is probably the line most WO posters would take.

Wow! I am surprised that you received so many merits for such gobble-dey-gook, and I was going to send you an smerit my lil selfie just because I was glad to see you, but I could not bring myself to click on the send button after I read what you actually posted.

You are presented a false dichotomy.

You will note that I did not send merit to Majormax’s post. “Merited by El duderino_ (10), vapourminer (1), Hueristic (1), suchmoon (1)”. None of these people sent merit to my post, which was strongly positive towards Bitcoin—only to his, which was negative towards Bitcoin. Not that I care: You brought it up, and it seems noteworthy in the context.

Instead, I wrote to Majormax a thoughtful reply in which I repudiated the concept of “HODL as an act of pure faith”. I thought he misinterpreted my post—as you certainly misinterpreted it, Jay. I was not hostile to Majormax; why should I be? He replied to me; I replied to him; that’s public discourse:

Quote from: death_wish on June 19, 2022, 10:11:33 PM

Do we call this “digital gold”? Well, let’s treat it as “like gold”!

Thereupon, I do NOT urge to “HODL as an act of pure faith”. No way!

Some of my recent posts have mentioned refocusing on Bitcoin’s fundamental value. In lieu of an in-depth exploration, here are a few points of cold realism, not “pure faith”:

At that point, I briefly described three reasons that Bitcoin has fundamental value. I noted that this was only a summary, and the list could be continued.

Others tend to appreciate my descriptions of Bitcoin’s value.

Reviewing recent posts on this thread, insofar as I can see, Jay, it looks to me that you are now picking a fight with me because (a) I value gold, and I compare Bitcoin favourably to gold; (b) I don’t buy TA, never really did, and now honestly declare broken lines broken instead of retreating to a Reality Distortion Field; (c) Majormax sent me a merit.

That shows some poor judgment on your part, as well as a flawed ability to analyze these issues.