Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 25007. (Read 26710643 times)

I take it you are ignoring my last response to you because it proves how ridiculous your assertion was?

BTC-e does not have the same requirements? And can I do what I said I would like to do there at btc-e? I dont want to link a bank account, I just would like to be able to trade BTC to fiat and then back to BTC.... I rather just have one point ( site ) that I have an account linked too... just dont like having that kind of info all over the place.

Just 150 coins btw. spot and that huobi bid wall. I dont see it going down.. have seen crazier things though  

EDIT: Getting redder...

<100 coins to test

Listen to this people!
Listen and understand!
JayJuanGee has spoken!

Fair enough.  Therefore, it is probably NOT good to post any FUD; however, if you are going to post FUD that goes contrary to the weight of the evidence and/or contrary to the bullish concepts in the BTC world, then you better back it up with some evidence, rather than just throwing it out there without any evidence. 

Maybe some may consider my above statement to be a double standard, but in reality, it is NOT a double standard because many of us who participate in this thread that are informed about bitcoin understand quite a few of the basics of the BTC fundamentals, and if posters are posting information that is contrary to those BTC basics, then the posters better have some fucking evidence...otherwise suffer the rath...... In this regard, either shut the fuck up or give a logical explanation regarding why the poster does NOT have evidence while taking into account BTC basics.

That candle sucked

I would think that would NOT be that difficult to accomplish, and just to abandon Bitstamp and move over to BTC-e or some other exchange that seems to NOT have those same levels of KYC requirements

Who am I to say? 

I am just a regular Joe Blow (oh by the way, that's NOT my real name), and I just thought that if facts are easily verifiable, then we should attempt to incorporate those known facts into our speculation(s), when feasible.

In this case, I thought that there were limitations on unverified accounts to be able to withdraw (whether fiat or BTC); however, maybe there are ways around such and maybe they can withdraw small amounts?  I really don't know, but I thought someone would be able to describe those facts to be able to fit them into any speculation that we might make regarding the most recent announcement of the 28 days to verify your account or else. 

Keep selling chunks of coins no matter the price or trend, the sooner you run out of coins the sooner we can moon without you.

Okay, now a question.

Now when I buy BTC, I usually do that via coinbase, but I was wondering, if I would transfer like 2 BTC to stamp, could I technically traded it and convert to dollars, and then have the dollars sitting in the base account to rebuy the BTC if I choose? As in no need to verify myself, and not link a bank account to trade so to say.

Simply put, you don't understand what you are talking about (and I knew immediately when you asked me to name names, despite the fact that is completely irrelevant to your own argument), are totally misapplying the fallacy, and are throwing me under the bus for your ignorance while calling me names. Why the hell should I cooperate with that, especially considering you did not cooperate with me by clarifying your position so I didn't have to read between the lines to figure out how ridiculous your argument is?

But you know what, I'm a glutton for punishment, so you want cooperation, here's your cooperation:

Correct way to apply the fallacy you referenced: Someone says "You don't like heroin? Well tylenol is a drug. If you want to get rid of heroin, you've got to get rid of tylenol."

Yes they are both drugs, but there is no logical connection to the level of damage one drug does over the other: people don't use tylenol to get high, and heroin causes significantly more damage. In order to agree with that statement, you need to make a whole lot of wild and incorrect assumptions about tylenol, namely that it will cause the same or close to the same amount of damage as heroin.

What I'm saying in light of that fallacy: Beartrolls and bulltrolls are both trolls. Trolls are trolls. If you want to complain about/ban some trolls, you've got to be willing to ban them all.

The only assumption being made is that both beartrolls and bulltrolls are trolls, which doesn't seem like that much of a leap of faith considering the word "troll" is in the name.

Your fallacy only applies when there is no clear connection, which means, as I have showcased as best I can, that it does not apply here. If you don't get it after all of that, well I just don't know what to tell you other than you are wrong.

Now if you want to argue whether bulltrolls exist or not, that's another issue. My point is simply that I did not commit the logical fallacy you are accusing me of, and if you truly understood that logical fallacy, you would know that.


Which is exactly my point. I don't care if people troll, but I do get annoyed by hypocrites that only want to focus on a specific subset of trolls.

Just deposit $3-$4 of bitcoin sell than do a $6 buy to get you $2 out.   hehehe

EDIT    Adam beat me to it.

then send 5$ of bitcoin sell it then buy 7$ of bitcoin back
 

Exactly. I can't be bothered. Might as well leave them there.

Explanation

everyone stfu the daily candle is about to solidify

and
there
it
goes

384. TodayIsABarndNewDay

Well that is a simple answer for me, BTC, then again i totally hate spybook so... mhhh

Thanks China, the Bitstamp criminals are in for a green awakening. Keep up the pressure and soon all criminal funds will be converted to BTC. It's like a short squeeze.

There is a $5 minimum limit on orders at stamp.

Always keep in mind, WhatsApp, a mobile chat program, was bought by Facebook for the sum of 22 billion dollars.

Bitcoin market cap is currently 5 billion dollars.

Which one would you rather HODL?