Re: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion

I just bought my first bitcoin. Exciting. Could some please share the actual S.R. 2.0 link. Thanks.

I really like what you did there.

That newbie is not me.

The Bitcoin Goddess is NOT PLEASED. Guess what She does when She is not pleased.

Yes, Jorge, I'm well aware of that. I thought it was a good joke, is all.
Look, the thing is that although you make some useful points, and you are consistently polite in doing so, you are becoming increasingly strident. The fact that you very selectively choose what to argue - and a lot of people have made some very good points against some of your mistaken assumptions recently - means that it's not really worth engaging with you. Literally no point, because you appear to ignore anything that doesn't fit with what you already believe and move on.
That, unfortunately, effectively makes you a very polite troll. And I mean troll in its proper web-forum sense here, not just 'someone who doesn't agree with you'.

Something about a pot and a kettle.

You're suggesting that I'm a very polite troll? That would be an odd thing to say.

I am not suggesting you are a troll, it is just that you accuse Jorge of doing exactly that, which most pro-bitcoiners do.(read text in bold)

Ahh. Right.
I'm not sure it's an entirely apt comparison, but I think we've spent enough time discussing Jorge.

EDIT: I guess that could be called selective arguing. So be it. I'm a big polite troll.

p0peji has a point. 'Selective arguing' is just as common (if not more) among the Bitcoin optimists in here as it is with the pessimists. The difference is context: this is a forum of people that, by and large, are (or at least once were) excited about Bitcoin. So the difference between 'troll' and 'not troll' is not whether you argue selectively, but if you do so in a context that puts you at odds with the majority of the other participants.

The other difference is intention. To be really called a troll, your goal has to be to get a rise out of the majority of those who hold an opinion contrary to yours.

I'd say point 1 applies to Jorge, but point 2 doesn't. I don't really believe his goal posting here is to incite anger (although he's probably amused by the reactions to a degree). I've said it before, but I think he actually has the misguided belief that he somehow has to convince us of the error of our ways.

This is fair enough: selective arguing goes both ways. Glossing over that, selectively, I've been picking up a little more of 2) in the Prof's posts recently. I can't blame him, since he takes a lot of heat here. But I can not engage with him any more. Either one of those is good reason not to waste your time with someone.