The auction is a giant stamp of approval, if not for bitcoin as a whole, than at least for the particular set of coins at auction.
I don't get this logic. It's neither approval or disapproval. It's just selling property. If the government sells a seized Ferrari - does that mean they implicitly approve of Ferrari?
u should rather use this example:
would the gov sell seized drugs?
Of course they wouldn't, drugs are illegal. Bitcoin is not - and has never been - illegal in the United States, so I don't see the 'approval' argument. Wasn't the legal designation of bitcoin as 'property' or something (IANAL) decision a while ago more of a stamp of approval than anything else?