Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 19042. (Read 26609927 times)

As I understand it, ETH is not militantly anti-bank, anti-state, or anti-government.
So my guess would be banks, nations and governments.
And, of course, Russians wishing to invest in disruptive technologies which wouldn't earn them 7 YEARS IN THE GULAG , Wall st. money currently waiting in the wings, and, of course, those who wish to see and see GAINS OF 1500% IN JUST TWO MONTHS

now that we have know ETH will soon displace bitcoin, who's left to buy the ETH any higher?

now that we have know ETH will soon displace bitcoin, who's left to buy the ETH any higher?

Of course, you have a right to post in response to whatever you like, and you certainly have plenty of companions in this same thread, in many other forum threads and in redit/bitcoin whining, exaggerating and spreading the same kinds of misinformation about the same topic.  


In my thinking it rises to the level of whining because it appears to be deceptive in a variety of ways.

Many of you goofballs engage in all kinds of fancy dancing in order to describe various scares about technical issues that don't really exist because when push comes to shove, you are not really concerned about technical issues (at least those who really understand the matter) but instead just want to whine, whine and whine and you want to insist on a hardfork or some other governance matter, which is really about disrupting while at the same time blaming the other side rather than attempts at resolution of potential technicalities in a reasonable and responsible manner.  

Possibly, half of you are paid shills, another 1/3 are misinformed or super emotional.  If these supposed technical matters had been presented continuously, argued and evidence set forth as a technical issue, then possibly there may have been some attempt at resolution, but based on the much illogical insistence on hard forks and other blackmailing attempts, i get the sense that technicalities continue to be exaggerated, which seems to be the case whenever looking into any details or evidence in support of technical block limit problem matters.  

Furthermore, the next move after seeing multiple flaws in the overall technical arguments, trolls like you tend to want to drag the topic into the weeds in order to distract and divert, when in the end all you seem to want is a hardfork (which gets us back to governance rather than real and concrete technical matters regarding possible problems with  the current blocksize limits).