He is one more in a row who is unable to see things from the right perspective, and like the majority, believes that Bitcoin was created to make people rich overnight, or to beat inflation overnight. People who invested in Bitcoin at different times have different opinions - the one from 2015 says that Bitcoin is an excellent hedge against inflation, the other who invested at prices higher than $20 000 obviously has a completely different opinion.
Which would be understandable if it was only Bitcoin they got, but the thing with these guys is they also got into other shitcoins, probably even into stocks and other assets, and they will not be going into other shitcoin forums or stock forums and yell the same things. As you say, better to ignore I guess. Can't help sometimes.
But why are we so concerned about this hedge against inflation which, anyway, was never even what it was supposed to be. I mean if it was, we would have seen something about it in the Bitcoin whitepaper right?
You don't have to. First, because there are times when an invention goes beyond what its creator foresaw, and second, because the fact that it was not explicitly included with the term inflation hedge in the whitepaper does not mean that it was not foreseen for it, being a deflationary currency, with a decreasing supply and with a total production limit of 21 million, it looks quite like inflation hedge.
That's the nature of evolution, I think Bitcoin will end up being very different things to what was originally envisioned but the thing is OP was complaining as if this was what (inflation hedge) Bitcoin was supposed to be, when it wasn't. Not to the point he was trying to make anyway.
Deflationary currency isn't the same as inflation hedge I would say. Inflation resistance maybe.