/biz/ - Business & Finance

>he still FUDs
All FUD needs to stop.
The end result of FUD is that you kill momentum. FUD to lower your entry price is retarded, because the lower price has a cost in momentum, which has an exponential cost in short to medium term gains. If you're doing it to get more bags yourself, you're even dumber than that. Damaging the reputation of your own investment or a potential future investment isn't some 4D chess move unless you know you're buying the absolute price floor and prepared to hold eternally. It's shooting yourself in the foot at best and shooting yourself in the mouth at worst. You want people to sell low just so you can buy and sell high later. Why will people buy high later? They'll dredge up the FUD you invented a month ago and turn it against you.

Just look at Rubic. RBC could have been make it for anyone who didn't already have LINK, but because of weeks of board spam, LARPing, photoshopped discord trannies, muh pajeet accusations and so on, many anons didn't buy in and now they won't, because the price floor is high enough that if you get in now your gains are lower and the potential loss (just in case it really IS a meme) is high. If the discord trannies had just bought in at 15 cents or whenever the peak of the FUD insanity started, instead of wasting hours shitposting, the price would be astronomical already. Was it really worth doing this to get more .30 bags, instead of keeping your mouth shut and riding whatever you could get to $3 in the same timespan?
>muh RBC shill/sour grapes
It was a no-brainer at under 10c if it was PROVEN to not be a rugpull shitcoin, but FUD still killed it good. There's much less reason to buy in now unless you're hoping for $10, which is chancier than $1. I'd deal with gas fees for a x5 in a month. I'm not going to buy in now for possibly another x5 by end of year, when I can get those same gains by just buying a top 50 reliable on an exchange without worrying about it.

tl;dr fudders, like swingies, are forever ngmi

>>27307732
Sure, but buying in now is only x2 or x3 profit in the medium term, versus the x5+ profit from getting in at .50 or below.
Compare this to even ETH, which still has an inevitable x5 left in it, along with many DeFi shitcoins that will outperform GRT in the short/medium term at this price point. The most valuable resource you actually have isn't money, it's time. If someone can make 5 x2 runs in the time it takes your x10 moonshot to play out, they're way ahead. That's how exponentiation works. Swingies getting the rope is a fun meme but half the time they get lambos. That's just how it is.
Not understanding this stuff is why you're ngmi.
>>27307854
Is a swingie going to delegate? No, he's going to swing. Probably at profit, too.
Is a coinbase normie going to delegate? No, he doesn't understand what Metamask is and just wants number to go up.
Is a poorfag going to delegate? No, the unreasonable gas fees, tax and chance to be jewed by their indexer make it unprofitable.
Is a DCAcuck going to delegate? No, for the reasons above and you can't progressively contribute to your delegated stack, it's all or nothing.
Many such cases!
This isn't even a FUD, because the compound APY is GRT's true value, but there's plenty to be said that's shitty about the current system. The reality is that you aren't locking most people in from one weekend of FOMO, and banking on this being the case is wishful thinking.
>>27308146
Imagine saying this when the market cap for $100 GRT is bigger than the current industry. It's possible eventually, you might even call it a good bet, but thinking it's a dead certainty is pure delusion. There are too many potential factors at play over the timeframe you're implying. 2 weeks ago, Melvin hedgies weren't on suicide watch. Things change. How do you know GRT won't just crab for the next 5 straight years? Or dump to zero if better tech replaces it? You do not.
>>27308206
TA is astrology. If it worked, nobody would ever lose at trading.

>>26165031
Still not a argument.

OH SHIT

Look who's saying actual relevant stuff again
https://www.bitchute.com/video/lfhdo1zEXm3l/

>>23798477
Okay, Molyneaux.

>>8725681
He cannot defend his stance of a no ICO, no premine privacy coin that is faster and cheaper than Bitcoin with Tor and I2P integration, and is the first with optional privacy is a shitcoin.

Because it is not.

>>8395827

>>8053570
Oof. Nice argument there kiddo. You really got me there.

>>7942474
Stop spinning cashlet, it's not working:
>>7941157
>What are zero confirmation transactions. Possible in Bitcoin Cash

THAT'S the issue. No, they are only safe for reversible transactions which makes BCH equivalent to BTC in that regard.
Which you admitted to in >>7942099. Your 'challenge' demands a 100% premium for risk and sell a reversible product.

>show everyone how stupid Bitcoin Segwit supporters

Meanwhile all you are doing is showing how dumb cashlets are. Please screenshot this thread and submit it to r/btc, I'm sure you're going to get lots of upvotes.

>>6120679

Enjoy the off chance that you get injected with javascript that infects your computer and robs your crypto accounts.

>>5529975

>>5443568

>>4373165
>>4373304
>>4373422

>>4007005

After the fork there is another fucking fork

FUCKING FORKS LEAVE MY SHITCOINS ALONE REEEEEEEE

>>2250779

Not. An. Argument

>>1933668
>He thinks he can out maneuver me with old /pol/ memes

Think again Fucko.

Now I know you're just baiting and laughing it up and having a good old time but I'm still going to break it down for (you).

Winning the lottery (a game of chance) is a random occurrence and requires no effort, education or input outside of walking up to a counter and buying a ticket. Someone winning the lottery is not proof that they worked hard for the money or even deserve it. They didn't win it out of "merit" they won it out of chance.

When people say meritocracy they are referring to a system in which people are rewarded based directly on their knowledge and willingness to work in any given field. It has nothing to do with gambling you unbelievable fuckwit.

>>1740567
dank argument 10/10 :^)

>>1701373