Chainlink pivots yet again

[Anonymous No.55469140]

Into another new buzzword “industry”. The dishonesty is sickening

[Anonymous No.55469152]

Maybe just focus on delivering staking and ccip before becoming a gaming company. Shit like this is why no serious investors give money to these scam artists.

[Anonymous No.55469156]

games? GAMES!?!??!
MY LIFE ISNT A FUCKING GAME

[Anonymous No.55469174]

>>55469140
>>55469152
Thanks for the screenshots you twitter fag. Elon is a beast. He knew this place was being ruined by cuck faggot normies retards who think being a tourist to this site is optional. It's not. This is a site for people who don't want to use any other platform. Who recognises the glownigger platforms for what they are. You are I are not alike. We are a different breed. We should be classed as a different species.

I see your post is you and your loser friends abusing successful people with retarded fud. I'm not even sure why you showed this.

[Anonymous No.55469189]

Why is Chainlink held at a higher standard than any other project? Cardano holders aren't acting like this even though they release things at a much slower rate than Chainlink. Ripple holders aren't acting like this even though Ripple is dumping more XRP than Chainlink is dumping LINK.

[Anonymous No.55469317]

>>55469189
because LINK marines are autistic kings that were promised infinite abundance
XRP and ADA fags are normies and trannies with slave morality

[Anonymous No.55469328]

>>55469189
>Why is Chainlink held at a higher standard than any other project?
Because everyone here knows how important the chainlink is. Everyone owns it and knows how valuable it is. Yet, it hasnt made them rich yet and theyre now throwing a tantrum cause theyre 5 years old and depend on other people to make them money.

Chainlink can take as long as they want, no one will catch them. Theyre building the highway that everyone will use, so fuck everybody else.

[Anonymous No.55469336]

>>55469140
Sergey has been talking about gaming being a target market for years you absolute faggot

[Anonymous No.55469337]

>>55469156
kek
this one was breddy gud

[Anonymous No.55469338]

>>55469328
>it hasnt made them rich yet
it hasn't done anything yet. It's not needed.

[Anonymous No.55469353]

>>55469338
>iTs nOt nEedEd
You know what it does you idiot.

[Anonymous No.55469396]

>>55469189
it's just this 1 schizo. probably lost his stack to bancor or something. you can recognize his posts because they're always mobile screenshots.

[Anonymous No.55469467]

>>55469317
>>55469328
>>55469396
I'm not talking about OP or autists who post here. I'm talking about Twitter fags. You have one guy threatining to shoot Sergey, and other posting under every tweet the same shit "why is LINK down 90%? When moon? Why not release X or Y? If you released X then I'd be rich...etc". Never seen any other project holders act as entitled as these faggots. Why can't they just sell and move on? I sincerely hope they never make it.

[Anonymous No.55469533]

>>55469317
>autistic kings
based autistic kings
fixd

[Anonymous No.55469545]

>>55469467
because link is the objectively the most important project in crypto and yet most people have lost most of their money on it. this inflicts massive mental strain and not everyone has the fortitude to handle that.

[sage No.55469587]

>>55469140
This is the shit I cant stand
They've got a million things on their plate that we're all waiting to be released, yet they post about some stupid gaming crap no one cares about or some random nft program that makes no sense to be pursuing right now.

I understand that it's all compartmentalized and that they have thousands of employees working on different things, but whoever is posting this crap must know that it irritates the holders.

[Anonymous No.55469665]

>>55469140
>>55469152

>*posts mobile screenshot*

Definitely taking financial advice from this Chud. Let me just go dump my baggies real quick

[Anonymous No.55469773]

gaming is actually one of the best ways to help r eddiors understand blockchain
put skins on a chain and they can be verified, can be randomly distributed and it will ensure that devs can't increase the supply of popular skins to cash in
it would also make trading far easier and the asset would be yours for life, it won't go disappear one day

this also relates to what kemal has been saying about products using blockchain as a service for parts of their business. none of this utopian ethereum bs about moving everything on-chain. so no games all on the blockchain, just parts that need it's "superpowers" like skins

also sergey has been talking about gaming for years along with defi and insurance and the first three verticals. pity none have really arrived yet but they will

[Anonymous No.55469794]

gayming is fucking cringe bro
maybe it was based in the 90s and the early 2000s but 2023 come the fuck on man half of these companies are just trannies enablers pandering to the mentally ill

[Anonymous No.55469920]

all these low iq replies that dont even read the publicly available roadmap
but i gotta to see the demoralization campaign has been near total in its victory, the level of viciousness and simple consistency of the attacks against link are unheard of in crypto
even dead shitcoins and more than -99% shit like icp doesnt get this level of attack
is this the power of paid for pro jeets or the collective impotent seething of anons that lost it in cefi
either way i appreciate the energy levels to just keep it up all day every day

in any case zero chance of it being surpassed by something else, good luck getting your scam oracle that frontruns transactions to be endorsed by swift

[Anonymous No.55470222]

biggest sell flag i ever seen

[Anonymous No.55470313]

>>55469189
I was told this is a Link board

>>55469174
Buy some boxing gloves before you hurt someone

>>55469328
>delusionial fantasy
Youre too far gone

>>55469336
Youre the target. Please proceed making this month’s donation.

>>55469396
>le bulgarians
See pic

[Anonymous No.55470338]

>>55469467
>I cant understand why people dont like losing 90% of their investment via scams

Your brain on biz

>>55469665
There was no financial advice offered.

>>55469773
>gaming “skins”
>le future of finance
Lmao

>>55469920
>roadmap
Still using shill terms from 2019 eh

[Anonymous No.55470342]

>>55470313
You out posting from your phone again, anon? Out in the fresh air phoneposting about Chainlink again?

[Anonymous No.55470364]

>open obvious fud thread
>filter op's id
>refresh
>read the 10 posts that are left and close the thread

[Anonymous No.55470369]

micropayments for optional gayming accessories not needed is the future?

and im supposed to be demoralized because of the fud?

[Anonymous No.55470838]

>>55469328
>throwing a tantrum
>chainlink crabbed for 3 years while all other crypto went 20x

faggot

[Anonymous No.55470880]

>>55470838
Good one. Haven't heard that before. You so got me

[Anonymous No.55470951]

>>55470880
he did got you indeed

[Anonymous No.55471091]

>>55470313
>>55470338
Wow, checking all the boxes. You must be le epic bulgarian ive heard so much about. Truly no sane and free man would get this down to such an exact and repetitive formula that their boredom would be tangible. I hope you get food on your table, ser!

[Anonymous No.55471174]

>>55470838
gottem
extremely based
watch that nigger seethe kek

[Anonymous No.55471202]

Personally i have given up on LINK. I have a suicide stack and thats it. Wasted years of my life on this since 2018. I slacked off on my career because i was relying on LINK being $100 by now or at least not under $10. I got liquidated on most my stack a while ago but have a suicide stack left and thats it.

I’ve been learning to code etc and i honestly feel way better. Having LINK hanging around my neck was a fucking prison. Stopped me from trying to make money and further my career. It was cancer really. Now that feeling is gone and i feel better and am on track to make good money eventually through my own work and it feels good.

If it moons to $1000 in 40 years in time to retire, great! I’ll have my suicide stack for then. As it stands despite being a great idea and key product, Chainlink labs is one kf the biggest failures in crypto when it comes to capitalising on its fundamentals and I personally do not have any confidence in them to deliver any time soon.

[Anonymous No.55471218]

>>55471202
it's alright, even sirgay fatfuck lost hundreds of millions worth of crypto on celsius, thing is he can just dump 10s of million of chainlink tokens on his toilets to make up for it

[Anonymous No.55471230]

>>55469152
is this the 4th industrial revolution you chain niggers promised?? games??

[Anonymous No.55471233]

>>55469920
Those dead coins dont get hate because they are dead.
Link gets hated because untold people have been invested for a long time and only known pain. Even OGs have spent longer in a horrific drawdown than it was performing well now. Much longer if you include 2018.

The fact it hasnt out right failed and exit scammed is even worse. It is continuously being developed and used, but there is this inexplicable disconnect where the fundamentals are incredibly but Chainlink labs ends up being the biggest failure in crypto for an utterly comedic lack of ability to capitalise on it. Who knows if it has malicious headwinds or not from bad actors, its not like Chainlink couldn’t realise it and deal with it.
Thats why it draws so much hate. A lot of people are wrecked, liquidated, waated years of their life, spent all their time holding in drawdown or even OGs significantly more than not. All for $6.5. Not even the most conservative anons like me who were thinking $100-$1000 starts in 2025 were expecting $6.5 in 2023.

If you understand that it makes sense why Chainlink is the most despised project in crypto among its holders.
I personally have no confidence in them to deliver any value to the token for 15-20 years. They actively work against it as far as im concerned.

[Anonymous No.55471250]

>>55469189
Because it dumped the most and pumped the least while being shilled the hardest

[Anonymous No.55471260]

>>55471250
Nobody puts this much energy into memes attacking anything else. Chainlink has generated more fudder seethe than any other project in history and for that alone it is very special.

[Anonymous No.55471263]

>>55471202
>I got liquidated on most my stack a while ago
greed is a powerful, powerful drug
this post just show how fucked up we humans are. this guy got a 150x+ out of a bear market and yet still casts himself as a victim. even now chainlink is up 60x from the ico
many such cases

take profit
set laddered sells
don't get greedy

[Anonymous No.55471270]

>>55471260
>laughing at me and making fun of me means i'm special

[Anonymous No.55471272]

>>55471270
That's exactly right. You get it, anon.

[Anonymous No.55471279]

>That's exactly right. You get it, anon.

[Anonymous No.55471287]

>>55471260
Mate, whats so hard to understand? Why do you think there is so much seethe from fudders? They were all holders or still are and feel untold anger towards this pathetic project and its utterly shit management.
Every other coin has 0.1% if the fundamentals LINK has but they do a better job capitalising on that for token value. Chainlink is so fucking pathetic at this its almost comedy. Most people have known nothing but pain holding this coin. Why the hell do you think people arent going to make these stupid memes and fud? Its called venting. Some people move on. Some people get angry. Some people seethe, and others complain. Its totally understandable.

Its not like the project just died.. its still ticking away with improving fundamentals… so why do token holders, OGs alike deserve to have experienced this pain? When projects with 0.1% of the fundamentals dont? When the fundamentals are so good? Why do they deserve it? Why does the team have to keep sabotaging it on top of that?

Its no mystery why people are so upset and despondent or even hateful.
I have completely lost all confidence in Chainlink to ever deliver any value to the token. I havent visited biz for months. I used to spoon feed here since 2018 almost daily. Yet i still have a suicide stack because the fundamentals are that good. Just as insurance if it accidentally moons in 15 years agains Sergeys incompetence.

[Anonymous No.55471295]

>>55469140
This is it LINK sisters... I don't know if I can stand to hold a second longer under this barrage of fud.

[Anonymous No.55471301]

Maybe they should hire more women and grifters for their team, I’m sure that will help speed things up

[Anonymous No.55471314]

>>55471263
Yes. It was greed. I think i had 14k at that point. Opened a long with cross and liquidation at like 0.00014 sats or something ridiculous low. I was trying ti be really conservative(although looking back i had enough yes it was greed).
I think after a couple years if interest the liquidation point rose to 0.00019 or whatever and thats that.
I was a greedy idiot considering my stack. I was wrongfully confident in the project despite my conservative views on when it would moon($100-1000 in 2025), i did not anticipate it being $5 or less in mid 2023. That was my stupidity. However, judging from the sentiment i dont think i was alone in expecting better than that even if no moon.

[Anonymous No.55471315]

Maybe they should let more women and grifters handle their warchest, i'm sure that will help speed things up!

[Anonymous No.55471320]

>>55471287
pathetic
take responsibility for your own decisions instead of acting like a child
they gave you a massive return which was likely enough to get you a house if you hadn't been so fucking greedy
now instead of taking responsibility you whine here and write multiple paragraphs about how hard it is for you... pathetic
this has happened to many before
if you look at the eth discussions there are STILL people taking about the eth/btc ratio (they are still down over 50% from 2017) and the 2018 bear were they went down over 90% against usd and eth
just shows how sad some people can be, they sitll can't get over that they didn't make more money..... and that's the ones that made it through 2018 and 2019... many didn't

[Anonymous No.55471340]

>>55471314
yeah that's sad anon
gambling like that just isn't worth it, 14k was/is more than enough
best to leave this place, the fud is bad here
stake the 1k and forget about it
there's a reason for the quote:
>Markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.
tesla investors who bought in 2015 were at a loss in 2019 for example
multi-year pain in investing is normal, you are not unique or special

[Anonymous No.55471395]

>>55471340

Yep. It sucks because’d love to buy a few thousand tokens right now but i havent got the funds to do so. I learned a lesson. Im not confident LINK will moon anymore anyway, but its not like I would not like to own more if I could afford it.
I took some profits over the years. Used them to move to a new country. Got married. Attended a foreign language school, and was semi-retired. So i cant say i got nothing out of it. However, i invested too much faith into it and neglected my career due to it. I mean i was just expecting $20-30 right now at a minimum really, even way back then. Its still shocking to me just how under my really conservative expectations this all went, and i know exactly why now in hindsight it is so.
Hell if i could get inheritance early i’d buy much now, but thats not happening. Right now my money is all going on cost of living and i cant risk putting what savings i have into LINK when it realistically will probably he $3 in 6 months or has a decent chance of it.

[Anonymous No.55471409]

>>55471395
Anon i feel for you
I had 90k links in 2018 and after a few months of leverage, gambling lost it all. A hard lesson for anyone. But hey, that's how we learn and become better

[Anonymous No.55471421]

>>55471395
>and i know exactly why now in hindsight it is so.
this type of thinking is a trap, saw just the same with ethtards in 2018
when you look at it objectively the pa is fucked up, we just had confirmation from swift that they are trialing chainlink as a "global abstraction layer" and yet the market did absolutely nothing
if link had doubled against eth and btc had doubled would that have been more "rational"?
i dunno you it just sounds like you have classic bear market depression... but understandably so too
1k is still okay, just going to be a long, long hold

[Anonymous No.55471428]

>>55471409
Yes. Im on track to become freelance software engineer now and its going well, and feels rewarding. Also started flipping and found a good niche with 200-300% margins even though volume is a little low its nice.
I can confidently say I wouldn’t have done these LINK never performed dogshit.
I’d love to have way more tokens, not even my original “make it” stack(feels stupid calling it that when urs 6.5 bucks in Q3 2023 lol) but its just not gonna happen now. Maybe if its still performing like shit in 2 years which is quite realistically possible i can buy some more.

[Anonymous No.55471429]

>>55469140
This thread is retarded but made me remember this picrel story and I started reminiscing. "Insane vertical rate" of industry adoption. That was the plan for 2022. And I remember it because it was when I knew I was over the hill on my hope for LINK. The market had already shit itself and JUSTed me in the process, who held practically nothing other than LINK which just brutally puked sats. Sergey turning out at the end of the bullcycle flogging off headlines and narratives as he should've all through the year prior, and its hopeless, instant evaporation into the air of market anxiety and macro tightening, was what the zoomers call a vibe shift. Watching some obscure thing I believed in defy the market through 2018 to then into the top 5 by Q32020 was the most extraordinary fucking experience of my life I think.

[Anonymous No.55471440]

>>55471421
I measure primarily in sats and always have, so no. If BTC went to ATH now i know LINK would struggle to hit $10 and probably be sub 0.0001 sats.

The reason the market did nothing with the SWIFT news is the same reason LINK has performed so bad despite having the best fundamentals possible. The leadership is comically bad at capitalising on its fundamentals to cause token price appreciation. I realised its not even SEC pussy footing. Its utterly incompetence and probably fuelled partly by complacency. We have evidence to support that they even work against any token value at this point and sabotage it.

[Anonymous No.55471445]

>>55471395
Hang in there and keep reporting to the sec. You have been blatently scammed (the team openly shilled celsius) and it will be answered for. Ill post more tomorrow, going to sleep

[Anonymous No.55471451]

>>55471340
>chainlink is le next heckin amazon/tesla/google

Cringe

>in reality its the next theranos

[Anonymous No.55471453]

>>55471295
>>55471260
Reality is fud though

[Anonymous No.55471462]

>>55471453
>Reality is fud
that's the chainlink bagholder motto
the cringe premainnet marine discord shills are the best example of reality being fud, even worse than the crypto twitter rejects

[Anonymous No.55471464]

>>55471429
>incoherent rambling

Did you say 2022? LOL. Hopefully when the sec cracks down, they’ll also go after social media influencers who perpetuated the grift and lost retail millions

[Anonymous No.55471465]

>>55469140
really, i have to thank you guys who are making these threads that are actually veiled ways to open up intelligent minds to discourse on the truly revolutionary developments being championed by the chainlink team. it's a refreshing way to learn new things about the project from. bravo

[Anonymous No.55471467]

>>55469328
It made me rich just fine and I only sold a bit on the run to 50

[Anonymous No.55471470]

>>55471464
>retard who doesn't read posts in full before getting triggered and strawmanning
Thanks dumbcunt

[Anonymous No.55471485]

>>55471233
Then sell and move on. Why are you so scared to do so?

[Anonymous No.55471495]

>>55469140
Chainlink have been involved in crypto gaming for a long-ass time, tardboy.

[Anonymous No.55471498]

>>55471429

Thats LINK all over. The initial 2019- aug 2020 bull was nothing to do with them. I know what you mean by the absolute tone dead vibe shift after the lights had already switched off in 2022. Like i get the feeling they were trying to improve but there is a massive disconnect and incompetence. Its pathetic. They’ll probably look back and say “it didnt work” even though there attempts are criminally bad till now, and when the market turns bull over all they’ll be back to their minimal shit approach justifying their previous attempt as a failure even though it was at the wrong time, and with a shit method.

ADELYN was so, so, so bad for the project and they only got rid of her way too late lol.
Every attempt they do with marketing just feels “off” and inefficient/ineffective considering the biblical fundamentals they have.

>crappy marketing attempts
>slightly better
>swift
>no follow up
>btw we are going to dump some more

Its like… they arent even aware one of the largest negative narratives is the token dumps. Everything about it is so fucking out of touch.

[Anonymous No.55471507]

>>55469189
this

>>55471250
>shilled the hardest
You mean fudded the hardest.

[Anonymous No.55471510]

>>55471233
>but there is this inexplicable disconnect where the fundamentals are incredibly
As someone who would be happy to buy LINK if this was actually true...honestly the fundamentals are dogshit.
The token exists to be sold. It's actually needed too much...the nodes rely on the ability to literally dump the token for the network to function.
Imo the best thing it has going for it is the potential ponzinomics of staking. I'll definitely take a look at it if/when the real version of staking that was promised whatever amount of years ago actually comes out. But until then it's honestly one of the worst tokenomics wise.
Also I'm pretty sure based on what I've been reading/hearing so far wrt to CCIP, that it's actually going to result in more node subsidies than there are now. Since nodes will be paying gas fees that are then paid out via LINK as subsidy as is the status quo. Obviously I can't say that with 100% certainty without being an insider. But from what people who have looked closely at the code are saying, there's nothing so far to suggest anything other than exactly that happening when CCIP comes out. Which is pretty devatasting from trying to sell the token as a speculative investment over a matter of the next two years or whatever during a bull run.
Basically the argument for the token comes from tradfi buying in for staking or something 5 years plus down the line.
If that happens I'll be here to buy in. But I'm not missing life changing crypto bull runs for something that's supposed to unironically be happening on a 5-10 year scale with a token that is used to fund development and subsidize nodes.
I'm not saying anyone should sell. Since I suppose any day we could wake up and have institutions buying in or something. But the idea of buying it as a bull market speculative investment seems sketch.

[Anonymous No.55471513]

>>55471498
>Its like… they arent even aware one of the largest negative narratives is the token dumps
That narrative is bunk.
Most top coins dump(ed) more supply than Chainlink did.

Pic is just one example.

>>55471510
>nodes rely on the ability to literally dump the token for the network to function
You mean exactly like how BTC miners rely on the ability to dump their mining rewards?

[Anonymous No.55471520]

>>55471498
To be fair, your posts are extremely cognitively dissonant. You seem to be angry at the project which is all very valid and I share your disappointment, but you rave about incompetence and your "lack of faith that Chainlink will ever deliver" which you reiterate several times before stating plainly you wish you had more and that with a windfall you would buy more. I think you're more angry at yourself for liquidating your stack. Not a hard read actually. As well, scheduling the dumps is essentially the only option they had in that regard. The dumps were an explicit part of the model for the company since whitepaper.

Regardless, yes, absolutely horrific effort on their part through 2021 and more broadly to draw value into the token itself. I do think LINK runs again but like I said before it will never get that magic back. It'll never do what it pulled off in 2020. I have a modest sell point which I'm obviously not going to share. It's been a life-obliterating 2+ years for me but I've worked all the way through it and will be seeking new entries in new projects for the next cycle.

[Anonymous No.55471535]

>>55471520
>absolutely horrific effort on their part through 2021
I'd argue they killed their own momentum in August/September 2020.
They could've very easily released staking v0.1 at that time, just to show they were doing SOMETHING. I mean it's literally just a holding wallet.

[Anonymous No.55471537]

>>55471520
Funny how these new projects that launch have no fundamentals/are outright scams but still they run because this nigger cryptospace is just a scam

[Anonymous No.55471538]

>>55471510
Good write up and a good take imo.
When i mentioned the fundamentals, im not necessary talking about the token economics. we all know crypto pumps on hype and narratives. what im meaning is they are so, so, so, so bad at using there strong fundamentals not including the actually token economics and marketing it or leveraging it for attention to get these narratives going. using it as an asset in marketing.
Their marketing is so fucking BAD. even now with them "trying".
I had not thought about CCIP, but had a similar thought to the matter as you anyway. thats basically how i see it going myself too.


>>55471513
yes, they did, but it is not a narrative against those coins. narratives arent factoids, they are narratives. and thats what drives speculation. its a narrative on LINK, right or wrong, and they are so tone death and unaware of it they do nothing to help it but actually just strengthen it and ruin the rest of their shit marketing lol.

Also, BTC miners have a feedback loop where the cost of mining serves as a base-line price for a bitcoin. it can dance around it but its there.
Where is a baseline for LINK? there is none because no matter what price it is, sergey will deliver millions of tokens to subsidies people and let them sell it to break even. they never "go bust" like BTC miners do. if anything, the lower the price of LINK the WORSE the sell pressure from subsidies gets because they need to give and sell more tokens to cover gas costs. its basically the opposite of BTC.

[Anonymous No.55471542]

>>55471538
>but it is not a narrative against those coins
No it's not.
But that's not Sergey's or Chainlink's fault, that one's entirely on the fudders.

[Anonymous No.55471544]

>>55471538
>BTC miners have a feedback loop where the cost of mining serves as a base-line price for a bitcoin
yes, chainniggers comparing btc miner dumping to fatass sirgay dumping have lost the argument before they started kek

[Anonymous No.55471552]

>>55471535
the performance in that period was entirely driven by the holders/community, and basically nothing Chainlink themselves did. maybe releasing mainnet was the only "catalyst" they had a hand in.
when you realise that, you understand how futile it is to ever expect them to recover and do better than those years ever again. all we can hope for is for the subsidy period to end, and the real original network of staking from the original white paper with thousands of banks and corporations and skaters all online. thats 10-15 more years as far as im concerned.

[Anonymous No.55471558]

>>55471538
>>55471544
>BTC miners have a feedback loop where the cost of mining serves as a base-line price for a bitcoin
No it doesn't.
If big miners shut off because of that, smaller miners simply pick up the slack as the baseline price just lowers.
Which is why the production cost of Bitcoin varies wildly.

>>55471552
>the performance in that period was entirely driven by the holders/community
whoa, you mean by speculation????

[Anonymous No.55471562]

>>55471535
Anything to stem the sats implosion and start riding the waves properly through 2021 would've been greatly appreciated. It is particularly infuriating to be the team with the "we're just going to get on with building cool stuff" ethos then proceeding to deliver absolutely fuck all. Fair to say the reason everyone's projections for price through the bull ended up so inaccurate was that they were based on LINK standing its ground rather than starting to bleed to the market, then continue to bleed even more through the bear. I'm embarrassed with myself for how I played this whole thing.

>>55471537
I resent it but living through 2021 gave me a refreshed perspective on this game we've all chosen to play.

[Anonymous No.55471567]

>>55471558
stop, you're embarrassing yourself trying to compare btc mining to kyc node operation for a centralized token with a negative feedback loop controlled by an obese retard that fatfingered au as ag KEK

[Anonymous No.55471574]

>>55471558
>whoa, you mean by speculation????
Yeah, I agree, this anon keeps contradicting himself. You say price builds off narratives and it's the team's fault for not building a narrative for the 2021 cycle, fine, but LINK rose from obscurity to the top 5 in 2020 as the leader for the DeFi speculative pump.

[Anonymous No.55471576]

>>55471513
Kinda.
I'm not saying nodes should do it for free. But the outlook for a better economic model is like 3 years plus or something atm.
I'll be happy to buy some link when staking 1.0 and everything else is on the horizon. I'm sure I'll be one of the first people in the world to know just by virtue of being here.
I'm anti-link or anything. I just think the people who have been buying it the last few years are the ones subsidizing the development and such. And the timelines are long.
Really it'd be fucking amazing to get one more standard crypto bull run, take a bunch of profits after that and have some event where link sort of exits crypto in some way.
Imo if anything good is going to happen, it'd probably be something like that just going off the time frames here.
I wouldn't want to miss it. But I'm not going wait and hold either.

[Anonymous No.55471585]

my only hope are ETH whales who gobbled LINK. They are not for 2% per year gain. They know it will moon.

[Anonymous No.55471589]

>>55471520
>horrific effort.... to draw value into the token itself
I disagree profoundly with this whole way of thinking. Chainlink is not about making 'investors' money. The way i see it is that the token is needed for many reasons discussed elsewhere, but the token price (as far as the network is concerned) is arbitrary, and customers will always end up paying the same dollar equivalent for a service regardless of the Link price. Obviously then the Link price would go up as network use increases, but then services would require less fractions of Link tokens. The notion that Chainlink should be trying to increase the price is meaningless in this context. If you want the price to go up you should be trying to get more people to use the network, it's as simple as that. And this is exactly what they're doing.
Greedy fuckers whining everywhere about the price is not only pointless but it's fundamentally misses the point.
If a pool table required $1 worth of tokens to operate, would you whine that you wanted to only have to insert 5 tokens (at 20 cents each) instead of 10 (at 10 cents each)? It's the same thing here. Think about it.

[Anonymous No.55471592]

>>55471567
>trying to compare btc mining to kyc node operation
BTC mining itself is 99.999999999999% a "kyc node operation". See pic.

[Anonymous No.55471594]

>>55471562
>Anything to stem the sats implosion and start riding the waves properly through 2021 would've been greatly appreciated.
I'd argue 2021 was in many ways Chainlink's biggest year in terms of fundamentals; that's the year they exploded in terms of adoption and Defi dominance for instance; see pic.
That's also the year when the Bitcoin suppression was probably at its most egregious; also see pic.

[Anonymous No.55471607]

>>55471594
i havent visited for months. i take breaks often from biz. However whenever i visit you are always here with these graphs. You honestly feel like an antique from a passed era at this point lol. most people have evolved, had revelations or understand the trajectory of LINK a bit differently or better now. you are still here like 2020 mode.

[Anonymous No.55471618]

>>55471592
You didn't read the .png you posted and you don't know what kyc is
keep showing off that extra chromosome, chainnigger

[Anonymous No.55471622]

>>55471589
What I've called "drawing value into the token" is what you've just called building the network, delivering. You've just evaded the point of the whole conversation which is the underperformance from a team that, ironically, brands itself as "focused on building", and who apparently consider ordinary marketing efforts beneath them. There is no reason why you cannot build and market simultaneously, at a minimum to take the pressure of bagholders who are funding the company's development. You're making it out that these are mutually exclusive things. You can say it's "not about making investors money", but there is a clear synergy here that Sergey and team have increasingly been forced to recognise.

[Anonymous No.55471626]

>>55471589
Its the subsidising time of the network. simple as that.
You aren't wrong, but it brings absolutely no value to the token at all. even more users is just potentially more value later when subsidies end at this point. it has way more users than 2020,2021, etc but prices is at lowest levels for half a decade.

there is no baseline. the fact we work in USD amounts fo network fees is a symptom of the subsidy based model we are working on with bootstrapping phase. it has a negative feedback on price. the lower the price, the more tokens must be sold, and more sell pressure to keep nodes in profit. nodes will ever go bust.
as other anon said, only once this period ends can we see price growth like BTC and comparisons to mining.
Can speculation happen anyway? obviously. is it smart to expect it with their marketing and all this baggage? no.
is it smart to accumulate for the next 10 years for when subsidies/boot strapping ends? probably.

[Anonymous No.55471630]

>>55471594
I don't go for this kind of bullshit, anon. It's a way of someone origamiing objectively and in some ways uniquely terrible price performance back into your original bias towards the project. There's nothing objective about it and it's an extreme opinion that I don't consider useful to a money-making strategy.

[Anonymous No.55471632]

>>55471607
>everyone who posts a pic on an imageboard is the same person
fucking lmao

>>55471618
All of those mining pools in that pic are KYC.

[Anonymous No.55471637]

>>55471630
>There's nothing objective about it
lol what?

1) big news for Chainlink
2) massive Bitcoin drop shortly after (a few hours in this case)

That's as objective as it gets.

[Anonymous No.55471647]

>>55471637
Blaming sustained underperformance (i.e. your position being wrong from an investment perspective) on market conspiracy is immature and again doesn't belong in a money-making strategy. At least not mine. This whole market is manipulated relative to most others. The KPI is still to get rich.

[Anonymous No.55471659]

>>55471630
>>55471647
It is irrefutable that BTC was being dumped on positive LINK news/important price points

[Anonymous No.55471660]

>>55471630
I see it like this:

>traditional growth based company investment pattern:
Private shares. they sell them to investors. investors have long horizons. the share get periodically valued based on user growth, and projected revenues later when public.
The company has to be very careful about issuing more shares or loses its financing on investment rounds. they use the money investors give them to continue to grow their networks.
share are not liquid in this period, and investors know that before investing.
Eventually they go public and everyone realises a return.

>chainlink:
fully liquid shares immediately. gets financing from them. investors cant value it based on future growth or projected revenues because constant share dilution and releasing of tokens on market for financing. creates a negative feedback loop if no speculation can overcome it.

So it seems LINK cannot be valued base don its user growth and such unless the bootstrapping phase is over or at least substantially reduced.
I think traditional investors are quite familiar with this line of thinking and its probably why they dont touch LINK yet.

[Anonymous No.55471661]

>>55471632
>double digit iq chainnigger too stupid to realize that it refuted itself
stay poor loser kek

[Anonymous No.55471663]

>>55471622
>apparently consider ordinary marketing efforts beneath them
They have a new CMO who I think is doing a noticeably improved job of marketing. You don't think so? Also, there is only so much marketing can be done with a service of this type. It's not for the retail market, as you know. Who knows what targeted marketing is going on? I'd guess there is.
>>55471626
Nice demoralisation fud. It was going well, i thought, but you gave it away at the end when you couldn't resist your 10-year prediction. 4/10

[Anonymous No.55471672]

>>55471647
>your position being wrong from an investment perspective
I invested in a nascent oracle network, and that oracle network became the absolute biggest player in the space, allowing for new markets (Defi) to even exist.
I'd say I was 100% right about my investment.

>>55471661
>bitcoin nodes being KYC refutes the notion that bitcoin nodes are KYC
lol

[Anonymous No.55471674]

>>55471663
How long do you think this subsidising period will last?
Will sergey just keep it up till he runs out of LINK? or will he have some kind of goal to stop it?
at current rates it will take 10 years to deplete

[Anonymous No.55471675]

>>55471674
>How long do you think this subsidising period will last?
Bitcoin's subsidizing period will last another 100 years or so.
ETH's doesn't even have a time limit.

[Anonymous No.55471686]

>>55471660
>hurrr bootstrapping and token dumps creates a negative feedback loop
>but only for chainlink!
The majority of top coins dump more tokens, and blockchains have always had bootstrapping (i.e. mining rewards).
Back in the early years of Bitcoin (i.e. when it made its biggest gains) its inflation rate was like 40-50% per year.

Your double standard is hilariously massive.

[Anonymous No.55471693]

>>55471674
>how long
I seriously doubt it will take 10 years to implement Tokenomics 2.0
I have a great idea for you, though. Why don't you sell all you Link tokens, invest elsewhere, and come back in say, 9 and a half years and buy back in at the same price? That way, not only will you have been proven right, but you'll profit handsomely? Seriously, go for it, and let us know how that works out for you.

[Anonymous No.55471696]

>>55471663
>new CMO
That's fine. The conversation was about historical underperformance.

>>55471672
Legitimately good for you, anon. I personally do not consider my current position to be a successful one given I bought LINK in 2017 with the intent to make money. That certainly worked up until August 2020, which I recognised at the time as the likely top, but left me with an awkward amount of money I didn't want to sell. Never did I think it would bleed 90% of its sats value from there and fall from the top 5 to well outside the top 20. For me, that was me being wrong about my investment. I will not polish that massive and comically stupid positioning ahead of a bullrun with excuses about manipulation in a manipulated market. I will grow and do better this cycle with an adapted strategy.

[Anonymous No.55471697]

>>55471675

Thats not a subsidy lol. Its a block reward.
If the block rewards is not worth enough money to cover miners costs, they go bankrupt and switch off. This happens constantly.

If chainlinks value is too lower and nodes go bankrupt, sergey just gives them some more to keep them in profit. Whether link is $0.10 0r $100.

How can you not see the the difference and the implications?

[Anonymous No.55471706]

>>55471287
>Chainlink has generated a lot of seethe
>replies with a wall of text so monumental nobody would ever read past the first 10 words.
I assume you're agreeing

[Anonymous No.55471709]

>>55471686
And so its no surprise other coins operating like that are performing shit too?
Only coins with speculation on top are doing ok or things without that subsidy based model, like LTC, etc are doing OK now

[Anonymous No.55471711]

>>55471697
>Thats not a subsidy lol. Its a block reward.
Block rewards are subsidies.

>If the block rewards is not worth enough money to cover miners costs, they go bankrupt and switch off.
Yes, without subsidies a lot of projects will fail.

>If chainlinks value is too lower and nodes go bankrupt, sergey just gives them some more to keep them in profit
Getting more or less subsidies does not change the nature of the subsidies.
Bitcoin miners got a lot more subsidies in the early days of Bitcoin mining than Link nodes will ever get.

[Anonymous No.55471725]

>>55471709
>its no surprise other coins operating like that are performing shit too
They really aren't.
Solana for instance dumped token supply at a rate dozens of times higher than Sergey, and they're still in the top 10, like 5 ranks from their ATH ranking.

[Anonymous No.55471734]

>but solana did it
this is peak cope from an esl chainnigger

[Anonymous No.55471739]

>>55471734
Has it dawned on you that everyone itt is capable of engaging in a useful conversation except you? Are you proud of yourself? I hope you're not a grown man, anon.

[Anonymous No.55471742]

>>55471696
>I personally do not consider my current position to be a successful one given I bought LINK in 2017 with the intent to make money
And why did you buy Link in 2017?

>>55471734
>SERGEY DUMPS TOO MUCH AND THAT'S WHY THE PRICE IS BAD
>NOOOOOO DON'T LOOK AT OTHER CRYPTOS WHOSE PRICE ISN'T SO BAD BUT WHO DUMP A LOT MORE!!!!!

[Anonymous No.55471749]

>>55471711
Ok. You can call it a subsidy if you can. But lets say then, chainlink has a very heavy subsidy by comparison which will guarantee profit for a node no matter how inefficient they are or whatever market conditions.

Meanwhile btc “subsidy” is small and regularly results in inefficient miners or miners not willing to make a loss for a while to have to switch off or just go bankrupt.

Now obvious the striking difference here has big implications

[Anonymous No.55471750]

uh oh, the chainnigger advocate is getting mad when it can't make an argument

[Anonymous No.55471764]

>>55471742
As I said, to make money. If you mean my rationale, I'd bet it was functionally identical to yours. As I go on to say, that worked until 2020 before it abruptly stopped and has done nothing other than wrack up an enormous bill of 2+ years worth of eyewatering opportunity cost spent on lessons in stubbornness, inflexibility, poor planning, and ego.

[Anonymous No.55471765]

>>55471749
>You can call it a subsidy
It literally is.
Only when miners are paid 100% by the end users (transaction fees) will the Bitcoin network no longer be subsidized.
Block rewards come from a stash created out of thin air by Satoshi.

>btc “subsidy” is small
It was huge back in the early days: 50% annual inflation.
It was actually a lot higher in the very early days, but I'm talking about when half of /g/ was mining it.

[Anonymous No.55471771]

>>55471764
>As I said, to make money
Why did you think Chainlink would make you money?

[Anonymous No.55471774]

>>55471765
You literally just keep avoiding the main point and going off on schematics.
The link subsidy is elastic, the BTC one has never ever been.

[Anonymous No.55471775]

>>55471696
>historical underperformance
What is it underperforming? what are you comparing it to? Can you think of similar projects with comparable goals which you can say Chainlink has appeared poor alongside?

[Anonymous No.55471781]

>>55471774
>The link subsidy is elastic, the BTC one has never ever been.
A subsidy being elastich or static changes nothing about the fact that it's a subsidy.

[Anonymous No.55471783]

>>55471771
Exactly. as you say, our role is to subsidies the network and realise no return. why must they argue?

[Anonymous No.55471788]

>>55471771
I'm not going to go through a Socratic interrogation here, anon, but am open to your point. As I said, I'm sure my rationale was the same as yours. The point remains that I would've made the "right" investment decision with a different interim strategy for profit taking. There's really no way to change that reality through semantics. The correct thing was to pivot in August 2020, which I knew I should at the time, and I made the wrong decisions for reasons outlined from which I've learned and intend to avoid in the future.

[Anonymous No.55471789]

>>55471783
>our role is to subsidies the network
No Link holder is subsidizing the network.
No Link holder ever had tokens taken away from them to be doled out to nodes.

[Anonymous No.55471792]

>A subsidy being elastich
t. esl chainnigger advocate

[Anonymous No.55471794]

>>55471781
You are still just completely ignoring the main point any way you can:
I'll say it one more time:
The difference between the BTC subsidy and LINK subsidy is massive. the BTC one results in a price floor range, and people regularly go bankrupt or eat a loss if not.

The LINK subsidy guarantees profit no matter what.
You cant see the difference and the implications of it. address this point instead of trying to worm away from it.

[Anonymous No.55471795]

>>55471788
>I'm sure my rationale was the same as yours.
We both bought Link because we felt oracles were going to grow in adoption, and Chainlink would be a major player in the oracle space.
This came true in a massive way. We were right.

[Anonymous No.55471800]

>>55471794
>the BTC one results in a price floor range
Subsidies tend to keep projects afloat, yes.

You do realize the actual goal of Satoshi is to wean nodes off subsidies completely, right?
That's why rewards are slashed every 5 years or so, until no rewards are given out at all anymore.

[Anonymous No.55471801]

>>55471775
Anon, it has fallen from the top 5 to outside the top 20 over the past 3 years. That's half its life. Is your tactic now really to deny that this constitutes underperformance? I'm not sure why I'm even engaging such a nonsense. If you're not going to meet me in reality we have no chance at a dialogue so I'll leave that with you.

[Anonymous No.55471812]

https://www.sec.gov/whistleblower

The Commission is authorized by Congress to provide monetary awards to eligible individuals who come forward with high-quality original information that leads to a Commission enforcement action in which over $1,000,000 in sanctions is ordered. The range for awards is between 10% and 30% of the money collected.

Report sirgay and get your reward, anon.

[Anonymous No.55471814]

>>55471800
so you continue to just avoid. you list why the BTC subsidy is successful, continue to ignore the massive difference between its subsidy level and LINKs, and try pretend LINKs subsidy is basically the same and will result in the same(even though it isnt and hasnt).

Where is LINKs slow predictable timeline of reduced subsidy?
You cant just pass off BTCS successful subsidy as LINKs inefficient and completely different one when it comes to token prices.

You arent worth talking to. your basically some kind of religious fanatic

[Anonymous No.55471818]

>>55471795
That was the rationale for placing a bet in LINK. It was not the end goal. Again, the KPI is profit, return. I failed to accomplish the KPI so I must adapt my rationales.

[Anonymous No.55471822]

>>55471788
>The correct thing was to pivot in August 2020, which I knew I should at the time
No you didn't, because you weren't psychic.
> I've learned and intend to avoid in the future
If you sell at $50 on the next rise you're taking an enormous risk, and will likely get fucked sideways by your decision. Your wordy posts amount to nothing more than 20/20 hindsight dressed up to appear as wisdom. You have no fucking clue what the price action of Link is going to be in the future, and I'd hazard a guess you have no intention of selling, either. You just want others to, clearly
>inb4 but i'm not selling at 50 next time i'm selling 50% ay 200 and blah blah blah
Shut up

[Anonymous No.55471824]

>>55471814
>You arent worth talking to.
Took you long enough to realize it. Nothing but whataboutisms and false analogies coming from that volunteer advocate.

[Anonymous No.55471828]

>>55471814
Whether the subsidy is on a fixed timeline or not doesn't change that it's a subsidy.

>>55471818
You cannot predict things like Doge, where speculation just runs rampant for completely random reasons.
You can only semi-predict fundamentals.

The former is gambling, the latter is "investing".
We were 100% right about our investment strategy, we were wrong about the gambling side of it.

[Anonymous No.55471834]

>>55471824
I havent visited for months, i take breaks here and there. honestly, every time i return there are less and less people like that idiot and its what i expect. more people realising and coming to terms with reality. im surprised there are any hold outs like them left. what the fuck lol.

[Anonymous No.55471836]

>>55471824
>whataboutisms and false analogies
kek

NETWORK BOOTSTRAPPING BAD*
*ᵇᵘᵗ ᵒnˡʸ ᶠᵒʳ ᶜʰᵃᶦnˡᶦnᵏ

[Anonymous No.55471849]

>>55471834
You're surprised people who still hold Link talk about Link, but you're not surprised at the countless 50pbtid Link haters like you are still talking about it.

What a completely organic and natural turn of events.

[Anonymous No.55471850]

>>55471836
>ignores any and all disclose and discussion on details
>sums it up as hyperbolic statements nobody has.

You may just be the last holdout on biz in the cult.

[Anonymous No.55471857]

>>55471801
>Is your tactic now really to deny that this constitutes underperformance
Yes, in fact it is. The 'performance' you lament was purely based on speculation. You want Chainlink to somehow maintain a speculated token price in order to assuage your sort's greed level? That demonstrates a real degree of ignorance about the entire project. Says a whole lot about the way you think, though.

[Anonymous No.55471860]

>>55471850
Subsidies are subsidies.
Whether they're fixed or elastic.

Like how poor people get fixed subsidies in terms of monthly handouts, or you can get elastic subsidies for instance by applying for business development funds.

[Anonymous No.55471880]

>>55471836
You are so assblasted that you have no argument, it's cute.
Go back to discord where the mods shield you from any criticism.

[Anonymous No.55471886]

>>55471880
>you have no argument
lol I just told you my argument in the post you replied to.

[Anonymous No.55471901]

>>55471886
>still no argument
What an assblasted reject. Get your lips back on sirgay's asshole and get ready for another bootstrap down your throat.

[Anonymous No.55471905]

So is this the bottom for LINK? Should I buy now or will the price fall lower still?

[Anonymous No.55471912]

>>55471822
>No you didn't, because you weren't psychic.
This is exactly the thinking that will not be informing my future approach. I knew it at the time because it was an extraordinary run up. I said it at the time to family, I said it on biz. Taking profits is part of managing risk and being financially responsible.

The rest of your post seems a bit theatrically aggressive for no apparent reason which is pretty telling. More telling is your certainty that it goes back to $50 and when.

>>55471857
If the team wants to dump supply on the market, there is undoubtedly a synergistic relationship between project and holders and it's this dynamic you don't confront in the same way I do. Your first line did literally make me lol, anon. I don't mean to be rude, but I have nowhere to take this conversation with you if you want to say the crumbling of market dominance is a success for anyone here with the KPI of profit. All the best.

>>55471828
I agree with that, anon, but it does make sense to adapt. With a sufficiently macro perspective and some discipline you can absolutely put a strategy (or portfolio) together which is distinct from "gambling" in the same way investing in just about anything else is too.

We've gone back and forth politely for a bit but I think have said everything we can to each other. We both do agree LINK will make moves through the next cycle again. It's not down only. We both hold bags. We both understand the fundamentals. I just don't see a strategy moving forward where I'm relying on LINK as my flagship for returns, or where it ever takes up the ludicrous share of my net worth and portfolio value as it has in the past now much of the mythos is thankfully dead. I'll be out of your hair completely once my fairly modest price targets are hit and either way legitimately hope for the best for both of us regardless of approach.

[Anonymous No.55471931]

>>55471905
people have been asking that for 3 years straight

[Anonymous No.55471941]

>>55471912
>I don't mean to be rude, but I have nowhere to take this conversation with you
Not at all, I'm always glad to end conversations with people who are (ostensibly) driven by short-term gains, and especially ones who 'knew' they should have sold at xyz but didn't because 'reasons'; reasons which they so charitably share with the rest of us, so we might all avoid the pitfalls which frontiersmen like yourself sacrificed yourselves upon. You're my hero.

[Anonymous No.55471995]

>>55471941
why so patronising? I think his experience is quite typical for all OGs.

[Anonymous No.55472017]

>>55471995
>why so patronising
I was mimicking his tone toward me. Did you miss that?
>I think his experience is quite typical for all OGs
Well, not this OG

[Anonymous No.55472053]

>>55472017
Na, you were def the first one to get catty and bitchy with your replies

[Anonymous No.55472098]

>>55472053
>catty and bitchy with your replies
A bit of sarcasm to counter fud is never a bad thing. Honing in my sarcasm however; well that's just good old fallacious argument which is nothing short of an admission of defeat. Thanks for playing.
*Note to readers: which fallacious argument will they employ next? Winning guesses get a free cocktail aboard the yacht!*

[Anonymous No.55472132]

>>55472098
Extremely cringe, shockingly stupid and gay post

[Anonymous No.55472150]

>>55472132
Lol “the yatch” is literally the cults language for “salvation”. Cringe indeed

[Anonymous No.55472169]

>>55472150
Pretty much, truly dumb behaviour from a group saying they are the next frontier of global finance etc, the singularity is literally a religious cult level legend
Highly gay

[Anonymous No.55472171]

>>55472132
>cringe
OMG i'm offended by your language and your tone. Why must you be so hurtful? lol
>>>55472150
>Lol “the yatch”
absolutely priceless kek

[Anonymous No.55472177]

>>55471674
At current rates its slightly under 6 years, this is some very basic math anon dont embarrass yourself
And thats about the only legit fud you can throw against the project, oversubsidation
Sergey should have done a halving with the dumps and force the nodes to double their costs let defi projects payup or wither away if they can't, alas it is not so
In this case sergey and our interest are alligned he needs the price to start rising soon or he will deplete his tokens, that is the one part where he objectively is a total retard depleting his supply rather then stretching it out indefinitely like the halving does to btc

[Anonymous No.55472195]

Thread has descended into fudders hurling fallacious rubbish and so I now declare myself the chad winner. Thank you all for squirming at my feet. I shall return again in future threads to appease your insatiable appetite for humiliation.
Bon soir, mon petits pois!

[Anonymous No.55472213]

>>55472195
Yes. A rational and successful investor that constantly refutes, promises cocktails and boat parties while writing nothing of substance and then ends their engagement with strange posts proclaiming themselves as elite and everyone else as insects.
No rational person is going to take you seriously. You are basically a moon boy

[Anonymous No.55472214]

>>55471440
i can just tell that you're the type of person who will say that you always knew that the big price rise was coming but just didn't have resources to catch it blah blah
stop blaming others and look at yourself, you dropped the ball bad
need to take responsibility for decisions
were you complaining about the lack of hype from team in 2020? no, you thought they were smart and playing this game on a different level from all the scammers and hype artists
if link had run to $200 in the last bull then again, you'd be telling us how smart you were
basically no one has any fucking clue what will happen, can only bet on the long-term picture, and we are still very, very early in that game

[Anonymous No.55472231]

>>55472214
You're dealing in objective fact so just go enjoy it
Far too many lost souls here, anon
Let em learn
I for one wish every sad cunt here a happy ending

[Anonymous No.55472253]

>>55472150
>>55472169
Imagine getting triggered by memes on 4chan.

[Anonymous No.55472311]

Every single time the entire fudsisterhood will always bring up some variation of subsidy bad, but only for link oddly enough missing the entire point to grasp

Holders dont subsidize shit, they arent deploying capital nor are their tokens taken from them
At the same time sergey dumped to an annualize rate of about 16% in the depths of the bearmarket and price action remained in the same channel through out while a host of black swans descended and ripped the space apart
So someone is deploying a rather large usd amount of capital continuously, now why would that be and might these entities be quite happy about their extended price unmoving accumulation

But not only that, all the points against link are so much worse against ripple far larger dumping and gigantic failure to deliver and of narrative, yet you dont see the unhinged fud there
Similar to eth last bear it dumped harder than link and stayed in a bear channel for 2 years and at that point it was still the question if it could ever come back and still eth didnt get the same treatment now why is that

Also as a final note why torture yourself so by holding link if this entire thread you showed you dont believe in investing for fundamentals, then link is clearly not for you sell it all and go invest in dog coins next run up i mean with your 20/20 hindsight you will surely catch the next shib, missing that was a greater opportunity cost than holding link which should tell you the stupidity of the concept

In conclusion link outperformed eth 5x in the worst bullmarket ever and people bitch like it failed, as always i smell newfags who bought the top of the summer of defi and seethe ever since in impotent rage

[Anonymous No.55472326]

ITT: somewhere in-between Anger and Depression

[Anonymous No.55473344]

>>55469140
another empty promise..great...

[Anonymous No.55473392]

>chainlink mentions one thing out of thousands that it can interface with

>"UMMM WOW PIVOT SCAM ANYONE? PIVOT SCAM? LOOK I MADE A TWITTER SCREENSHOT THREAD! BETTER SELL YOUR TOKENS NOW!"

i'm looking forward to these paid fud spammers being found, tortured, and murdered (but definitely not by me)

all fields

[Anonymous No.55473430]

>>55471905
It’s a low price if you want to get your suicide stack

[Anonymous No.55473517]

>>55472311
>link outperformed ETH 5x
Linktards are sergay’s bots. Always have been.

[Anonymous No.55473592]

>>55473517
Lol. I remember… jesus. It must have been over a fucking year ago now that some cultists were getting angry at some equally loser spammer who always wrote “90% down against eth”. It went to 80-85% down instead and some cultists were getting cocky pointing that out.

Now over a fucking year later its down 95% against eth lmao

[Anonymous No.55473628]

>>55473517
wrong way to measure that gains are expressed in dollars
bottom to peak link outperformed eth by a 5x
if you bought early that is and not at the peak of summer of defi, which i already explained to you why there are so many seething anons here

also funny you brought up eth, if you want to talk about failing narratives the eth triple halving merge narrative got rekt pretty hard now didnt it

[Anonymous No.55473634]

>>55473517
>>55473592
yeah but we bought the bottom, not the top
so the -95% number is kinda meaningless to us

[Anonymous No.55473756]

>>55473517
>2019
You left out a whole year lol

[Anonymous No.55473780]

>>55473634
I bought my stack in march 2018.
I dont like it when you try speak for me anon.
I have spent way more time in a terrible drawdown than i ever spent in upswing with LINK.
I don’t five a fuck how you frame it. 3 years is way too fucking long to bleed and be down 90% still.

Imagine you said people in 2008 were only in a drawdown because they didn’t buy back in 1984.

[Anonymous No.55473907]

>>55473634
Why do you claim to be happy while being in path to doom? I warned you earlier to dump your LINK for CYMI or TRIAS, but you never cared. Now see the price difference today. -95% today, next is -295%.

[Anonymous No.55474154]

>>55471725
>June 15, 2020
>LINK: $4.04
>QNT: $6.79
>ETH: $234
>BTC: $9419
>BNB: $16.83
>ADA: $0.07
>DOGE: $0.002
>SOL: $0.58

>June 15, 2023
>LINK: $5.27
>QNT: $98
>ETH: $1661
>BTC: $25475
>BNB: $236
>ADA: $0.26
>DOGE: $0.06
>SOL: $14.75

[Anonymous No.55474359]

>>55471789
>No Link holder is subsidizing the network
blatant lie, everybody knows about sergeys dump. we can only speculate what is "subsidized" with that money though.

[Anonymous No.55474370]

>>55474359
He definitely gained weight.
Its absolutely ludicrous for anyone to try claim no LINK tokens went towards feeding him.

[Anonymous No.55474381]

>>55474370
fucking Big Mac addict. Also roasties. The subsidies most certainly also went to roasties.

[Anonymous No.55474403]

>>55474359
nobody is saying sergey isnt dumping or that he isnt subsidizing the network
it is a fact however that a holder that bought ages ago does not subsidize the network as there is no cash flow

this then in turn begs the question exactly who is keeping the network afloat and as a stable coin by inserting the exact same amount of new cash as the node subsidies withdraw from the network

[Anonymous No.55474422]

>>55469794
VR is the future, wait until chain VR link blocks which will represent unique VR skins.

[Anonymous No.55474441]

>>55474403
Your attempt to twist it into this diarrhoea is dishonest and disgusting or may just self delusion.

It is still being subsidised by people who bout for $0.20. Why? Token dilution, price dampening from sales etc etc.
Other companies may get a line of credit at a cheap rate, and shareholders dont get screwed. ChainLink obviously doesn’t do that. They fund themselves and token holders expense.
Money doesn’t come from nowhere you fucking idiot.
If he never released and diluted tokens, even ignoring any price dampening by sales(so im being generous here) the token would be $10 at this marketcap right now.
That holder has definitely subsidised the network by sacrificing those gains.

[Anonymous No.55474442]

>>55469140
You invested in crypto, of course you're getting scammed.

[Anonymous No.55474453]

>>55469140
I'm surprised how anyone is still buying this price of crab
I just checked on it's grade rating and it's at fucking strong buy hahaha

[Anonymous No.55474458]

>>55474441
>If he never released and diluted tokens, even ignoring any price dampening by sales(so im being generous here) the token would be $10 at this marketcap right now.
You're retarded.
see pic

[Anonymous No.55474459]

>>55471495
How did that help the chart? Who cares then

>>55471513
>>55471637
>>55471659
>>55471686


The year is 2023, and the remaining LINK bull case is:
>mommy mommy its not fair, other coins do it too!
>you have brown hands because you criticize my cult
>this was always a 75 year hold
>its a conspiracy

The last point is the funniest. So you culties are admitting it is literally impossible for price to go up because of nefarious forces in the background. In other words, your investment strategy is to hold something you acknowledge cant make you money. Bahahahahahahah

[Anonymous No.55474469]

>>55474459
>the remaining LINK bull case is:
>>mommy mommy its not fair, other coins do it too!
That's not the bull case, that's the "stop whining about Sergey dumping tokens when nearly every crypto dumps more" case.

[Anonymous No.55474480]

>>55474422
Maybe VR games could change the narrative, most of the existing crypto games are pure shit and not even fun to play
I'm waiting for holoride to integrate incentives into it's vr game

[Anonymous No.55474483]

>>55474458
Solana had vc kikes pumping it. Why are you acting like this is some kind of gottacha? Why are you still posting the same faggy images after 2 years. I already mentioned this. You are like a little time warp antique.

Like is diluting and dumping to subsidise without any additional tailwinds. What the fuck do you expect? Cannot see the fucking difference because you are one of the most stubbornly indoctrinated sunken cost fallacy bagholder to exist.
Sergey could literally go to jail and you’d start trying to prove how he must be innocent and we dont know everything.

[Anonymous No.55474495]

>>55471775
Chart is worse than vechain

>>55471795
>Im in it for the tech
Cringe

>>55471812
I dont think they pay out unless you have non public information, ie how much retail money Sergey and co lost on Celsius. I wouldnt be surprised to see a team member come forward at some point.

[Anonymous No.55474536]

>>55470222
I've followed it on TM sub grades for a while now and it's not looking good at all. Not sure how much it will respond when the bulls are back.

[Anonymous No.55474540]

>>55474459
Its worse than that.
You forgot to add
>the airdrops may become worth something later and be better than the LINK rewards from staking.

Its a freudian slip. They have more optimism and confidence in these airdrops than LINK itself at this point. One of the biggest shill narratives left is that you might make money from not link by holding link.

[Anonymous No.55474574]

>>55474441
beyond retarded
subsidies require new cash to come in, buying ages ago does not result in present day cash flow
if this simple fact is beyond your comprehension you arent too bright

[Anonymous No.55474583]

>>55474483
>Why are you acting like this is some kind of gottacha?
Because it shows how little effect token dilution has.

[Anonymous No.55474600]

>>55471857
>price may have gone down 90 but we cant say thats bad because it hurts my feelings
This is your brain on cult mental gymnastics. Fascinating

>>55471901
Lol. The word “bootstrapping” itself is such a joke. Culties love lapping up buzzwords like that

>>55471995
Because his feelings are hurt

>>55472177
>he price to start rising soon or he will deplete his tokens

And? Hes already worth half a bil bro. It only matters for you

>>55472195
Chart tho

>>55472214
>we are still very, very early in that game
Your scoreboard is broken

>>55473634
Lmao so your down millions…all because of a cult. Ouch

>>55474422
The advocates here will have fat boy release these at smartcon. Le future of finance

[Anonymous No.55474604]

>>55474453
That's just kind of if it's current sentiment bobo, doesn't mean that everyone is rushing up to buy LINK
learn how to use your tools better

[Anonymous No.55474610]

>>55474574
You are a waste of air.
let me hear you explain why Sergey shitting in your mouth is not a disrespectful act because you already stopped respecting yourself long ago.

you need help. you aren't smart enough or cognitively capable of investing. you just seem to be the type of person who will use all you have to rationalise things to yourself, even if you have to literally make up some stupid narrative and play with definitions to do it. that makes you useless to talk to

[Anonymous No.55474637]

>>55474610
Look at how emotional you're getting. It's best to leave emotions out of business and finance. It's part of the reason why women and children make terrible investors.

Just sell and never look back, or hold and spread positivity about your own investment.

[Anonymous No.55474651]

>>55474480
Personally, the only games I play are VR
Can't wait for when the apple headset goes live, could be bullish for projects focusing on that area

[Anonymous No.55474656]

>>55474442
This pretty much.

>invest in crypto
>whine about losing money

>post on /biz/ obsessively
>whine about getting bad advice

Might as well jump off a roof and whine about breaking your ankle.

[Anonymous No.55474722]

>>55474637
imagine holding an asset and actually spreading positivity about it. so cringe

[Anonymous No.55474726]

>>55474610
well if so then what does that say about you, having emotional outbursts over an investment you dont hold simply because others do
no matter how deluded it is to be expected people to talk about and be optimistic about their investment
but there is not 1 single reason to expect people to devote this much time to downtalking something they dont own without some other party paying them to do so, lets see how high your pbtid will go
i mean you are in this thread for 12 hours, almost like its a job or something

[Anonymous No.55474761]

>>55471607
>You honestly feel like an antique from a passed era
>most people have evolved

Says the 30 pbtid fudder who hates Chainlink and Sergey but still hasn’t sold.

[Anonymous No.55474853]

>>55474651
one of the reasons why I've still got faith in holoride, they got like audi behind them and all these big names

[Anonymous No.55474901]

>>55474604
what tool is that? totally makes no sense that it shows people are buying while we're still stuck at fucking $6

[Anonymous No.55475050]

>>55474761
Holding through the pain hahaha

[Anonymous No.55475059]

>>55469156
Sergey been playing games with our minds

[Anonymous No.55475077]

>>55474480
play to earn in the virtual world could be mad fun, especially when you do it sitting at the back of a car

[Anonymous No.55475108]

>>55474901
>It's TokenMetrics
being that cheap is your sign to be stacking kek

[Anonymous No.55475120]

I only hold link because it makes people seethe uncontrollably for hours on end

[Anonymous No.55475918]

>>55475120
thats the most fun part of it all, the levels of fud being thrown around here are now making people dig in and never selling
thus achieving the complete opposite of what they set out to do

[Anonymous No.55476012]

>>55475120
I hold CYMI and ACH because every crypto bros would definitely want to spend their crypto in place of fiat someday. LINK got no mainstream utility.

[Anonymous No.55476390]

Pivoting to more audits

[Anonymous No.55476559]

>>55476390
>Pivoting
They said this summer, are you retarded?

[Anonymous No.55476609]

>>55476390
unbelievable! they haven't even released the results of the last audit

[Anonymous No.55477378]

>>55476609
July 12th

[Anonymous No.55477391]

>>55477378
whats that? another pivot?

[Anonymous No.55477963]

>>55469189
Becasue this entire board basically own or owned chainlink. No one here cares about cardano. This entire board is link area so stop pretending it's always some werid thing to discuss link.

[Anonymous No.55477978]

>>55477963
that might work if this behavior was isolated to this place
but take a look at twatter or youtube, just looking through the replies of chainlinks own tweets is even worse than this place explain that
i didnt see dom getting multiple death threats from the same guy at almost everything he tweets despite completely obliterating all his retail investors

[Sage No.55478129]

>>55474610
>29 posts over 12 hours
>wasting thousands of hours of his life every year lowkey begging people on biz to sell
Whenever a fudcuck talks about a lack of self respect and buying the top it is ALWAYS projection. Kekfuddies are a lower form of life than internet jannies, which is why they're so miserable. RIP.

[Anonymous No.55478488]

>>55477391
vcs already pivoted to ai

[Anonymous No.55478530]

>>55471429
>Sergey turning out at the end of the bullcycle flogging off headlines and narratives as he should've all through the year prior, and its hopeless, instant evaporation into the air of market anxiety and macro
Correct. Hype doesn't work in anxiety and fear markets. If he put out these blog posts in 2022 link would have hit $100.