Most of us are in this scene long enough to have lived through at least one Halving. I cannot accept that anyone who's been through such experience would sell any amount of BTC now, unless it's part of a carefully laid out trading plan to take advantage of the volatility, and even then I would be very cautious.
Even though you are probably somewhat correct, AlcoHoDL, with your presumption that there are a decent number of WO thread regulars who have been through at least one halvening, in recent times, I am having my doubts about whether going through one halving is going to be enough for the vast majority of regular peeps, unless they happen to be decently rich before getting into bitcoin and putting a decent quantity of value into bitcoin before the effects of the halvening has truly kicked in.
In recent times, I am thinking that the vast majority of regular peeps are going to need to hold through a couple of halvenings, unless kind of best case scenarios develop, and we should not be assuming best case scenarios.
Even if someone has established an investment portfolio of $100k, and then decide to be somewhat aggressive with BTC with a 20% investment into BTC, that would only be $20k and might not be a sufficient amount to reach fuck you status.
Surely, I agree with what seems to be your essential message, and that is that there is a kind of algorithm that is quite likely to play out that is going to cause a likely stepping up in the BTC price, so no one who is seriously trying to grow his/her BTC investment should be fucking around with any kind of large amount of BTC selling, but instead be focusing on accumulating BTC in this price arena while it lasts... and my point remains that even if guys do that.. they are likely going to need a few BTC halvening cycles before they are likely to be able to get into a kind of comfort zone (or maybe 1.5 cycles might end up working out decently well for some too?)....
Maybe you're right and one Halving is not enough to harden a HoDLer so that he/she doesn't make a move like mindrust's. But going through (and surviving) the painful ATH-to-$3000 phase, you'd expect to be able to take the recent dip without much effort. If anything, it was (still is) a chance to accumulate some more coins before the
incoming mathematically certain algorithmic event.
As I do not have the expertise and experience of your very well thought out DCA planning, I consider my approach of Buy-HoDL-Wait a safe bet against short-term volatility panic attacks and towards a sure-to-come (for me) "mooning" phase, of reaching "fuck you" or "comfortable" status. The latter is good enough for me, as my needs are not really Lambos, hookers and blow, but, rather, being able to realise a few pretty reasonably achievable dreams in the near future.
Seems to me that the HODL strategy might even be stronger than any kind of incrementalism BTC cashing out plan that I have ever outlined because ultimately, one of the problems with trading any amounts of BTC is that HODLers tend to end up with some kind of third party risks, whether that is placing money on exchanges or otherwise having to put themselves at risk of dealing with various strangers for exchanging BTC.
The HODL strategy has been a decently profitable and prudent one for a lot of BTC investors, and it seems that Jimbo serves as a decent example of such strategy, and in essence, after he had gone through at least a couple of UP cycles, his current incrementalism cashing out strategy seems to be to merely cash out a sufficient amount of BTC as his needs come due or to anticipate a bit of his cashflow needs in advance and to maybe attempt a bit of timing to cash out the needed BTC in advance (hopefully at higher BTC prices, but even price does not necessarily seem to be a deal breaker once reaching a certain level of BTC profits).
Edit: I did feel that I needed to come back and quibble with your post wording a little bit more, AlcoHoDL, namely: "incoming mathematically certain algorithmic event." My quibble is with the concept of "certain." Of course, you likely realize what I am going to say, and maybe my quibbling is with the over idea of certainty, rather than specifically what you said...
Accordingly, we are not robots, so I have issues with anything that deals with humans as being mathematically "certain."
We should not aspire to mathematical "certainty" either, even though I get your point about the underlying code of bitcoin being structured in such a way that has a decently high level of certainty in it, but it is surely not "Turing complete" and looking at some of the fuck-ups in ethereum, probably it is not desirable to even strive for Turing completeness when dealing with certain kinds of possible errors...
I do agree with any implication that bitcoin is designed in such a way that creates sound money incentives, and even accounts for greedy human behaviors in that there are a lot of ways that bitcoin becomes stronger when individuals and institutions act in their own best interests and then compete against each other, which causes the network to become stronger, and likely sooner or later, we are going to have governments engaging in BTC mining and other kinds of activities like that in order to attempt to secure the bitcoin network, rather than fighting against the likely inevitability of bitcoin becoming stronger and stronger and stronger with the passage of time.
#quarantine 
