Experiences In Crypto

There is this belief that writers should constantly take part in some sort of English writing contest with each article published. Expectations are high but consider that this is not our job. We are not professional writers, and nobody pays us a wage to write.

I know my use of English is not what it should be, and I often struggle to find the correct approach, but perhaps this is the maximum I can achieve.

Upon reading my previous work, I discover I published a few decent pieces that perhaps even surpassed my limitations. With other articles, it feels I could have done a lot better, though.

Sometimes, the standards are not that high, especially when the crypto market does not offer too many opportunities. The interest thins, so the effort doesn’t justify sacrificing the same time and energy as before.

Yet, there are always some bitter commentators when the author expresses an opinion that contradicts mainstream crypto narratives.

Some only seem focused on reducing the validity of the arguments with claims of improper use of English or just by denouncing and offending the author with disturbing remarks.

This criticism is not constructive but aims to compel writers and forces them to quit.

This is the best I can accomplish for the time being. I don’t take part in a writing contest and don’t expect praise for my writing abilities. I only hope to convey a message to the best of my abilities.

English is not my native language, so that’s more or less the best I can present.

I still think transferring the information matters most when this is about cryptocurrency.

I Accept Criticism When It Is Constructive No Matter The Attitude

I write about cryptocurrencies according to my experiences and knowledge. And from the first moment, I understood there are boundaries in terms of quality.

Nonetheless, I believe the message is straightforward within my work, and perhaps someone can use against me the fact that occasionally I may write a difficult-to-read passage.  

We try to express the essence of our thoughts, present our work using correct terms, and apply our experience, logic, and knowledge.

We may receive bitter comments sometimes, simply because someone didn't like the point in the article.

They can't enter a debate to refute the points made but resort to producing remarks concerning quality like they expected to find perhaps Steven King explaining cryptocurrencies.

I block ad-hominem remarks by trolls, as the worst we can do is engage with spiteful commentators aiming to damage the writer instead of producing a worthwhile argument.  

However, I am serious when someone begins by stating "hey, this is all BS, because...". 

I'm interested in not publishing BS, and occasionally everyone is wrong. And when I publish "BS", I acknowledge my mistake and do everything possible to correct it.  

In some occasions I conveyed inaccurate information but took all necessary steps to rectify and inform my audience with the correct information.

1) One mistake was not to investigate further the M1 dollar chart,  when I published in June 2021 my article: Bitcoin's Perfect Symmetry In Replacing Fiat.

In this article, I presented the USD M1 Chart, mistakenly explaining that the money supply rapidly increased in the US by 350% in just a single day.

This chart kept bugging me after publishing this article, so I did more search on the topic and realized my mistake. It was indeed an accounting rule that changed.

However, I should have immediately avoided this mistake because of my background and studies since the fact alone the M1 chart changes on 1/1/2021 attributes to an accounting change and not an irrational increase of M1.

The FED included saving accounts in M1 that previously were only presented in the M2 & M3 charts. Thus this rapid rise in the M1 chart, which is a chart many still use on the internet without clearly understanding its purpose.

Many are still confused and don't recognize what this chart represents.

While each one of us has certain experience and expertise in a field (either at an average or superior level) those with a background in economics (no matter if this is Austrians or Keynseyans) easily see through the clueless arguments of the BTC maximalist mob.

2) My second gross error was about the futures markets in cryptocurrency exchanges, which I mistakenly believed required the backing of trades in the underlying asset.

A trader on Reddit aggressively reacted to my claims, and while he used derogatory terms, he also made a solid point and explained the process. After doing my research, I realized my mistake and took more than the necessary steps to rectify the situation.

I acknowledge any comment I receive no matter the temper of the commentator, and so I did with jmjavin at Reddit, who went on to explain the process after he realized I valued criticism and didn't want to misinform my audience.

I edited my article: Binance Naked-Shorting & Celsius Manipulation of Bitcoin Cash to present the process of the crypto derivative markets correctly and published a new one: (Perpetual And Cash Settled Futures) explaining my mistake and how these markets (perpetual futures) work in cryptocurrency.

Criticism doesn't affect me negatively, but I only embrace it when it is constructive. Even when this begins with a degrading comment, there can still be an argument that leads to progress. 

I don't reject the attitude.

You can write, "hey, Pantera, you are full of s**t,", but please proceed from there and explain why. I'm not going to dismiss knowledge or corrections but improve and adjust.

However, I didn't write a lengthy article to have someone name-calling in the comments section just because they were bitter.

This is increasing lately with comments made (especially on Medium) about my use of the English language or comments categorically denying my work and resorting to ad-hominem, but stopping right there, having nothing else to argue about and making no point to initiate a dialogue. These comments present the confirmation I need that I'm correctly approaching the topics by challenging narratives established inside the microcosmos of the BTC cult.

Spammers On Medium Massively Reported Me (Twice So Far)

On Medium, I've been massively reported by trolls twice so far, yet both times Medium accepted my arguments. I'm not writing to please maxis, and I don't write under any payment agreement, bounty, or sponsorship as the troll factory suggested to Medium.

Out of the reasons mentioned, the accusation against me was that somehow, I was involved in an inauthentic activity or that I participated in bounties. Trolls fantasized that I write sponsored content and get paid for it. No, there is nothing there.

Medium hires professional people with high integrity and wasn't going to fall to the fake reports of troll factories.

For the last ten years, this platform has witnessed all this manipulation and knows when to act.

My response to the accusations:

Medium read my arguments and accepted my position, taking my side in this incident:

More Reports And Suspended Accounts

It was the second time someone reported my Medium account. Previously my Twitter account was temporarily suspended and reactivated after I appealed.

A YouTube account and my LinkedIn were also targeted.

I maintain a LinkedIn account for three years which someone suddenly reported (only when I started publishing Bitcoin Cash material), with LinkedIn asking me to proceed with a mandatory KYC process before I could even appeal.

The pattern is obvious, yet I had no reason to keep using LinkedIn. I don't trust this platform (LinkedIn) which in the past suffered from serious breaches, hacks, and data leaks.

In Conclusion

When comments resort to ad hominem, it is always suspicious and shady, representing either someone biased or someone paid to provoke.

Of course, anyone can be bitter, especially when BTC is not acting as a Store of Value (SoV), although numerous writers explain this inconsistency in the maximalist narratives for years.

Bitcoin was always about improving money, and when I discovered BTC, it had already disregarded the initial revolution. I joined Bitcoin Cash, where like-minded people produce and develop what matches my vision of money.

Sometimes we all make mistakes. Some things we've learned or experienced change with time, and what was not common a few years ago can become dominant in the future.

• Cover Photo by " Uriel SC", on Unsplash

Posting on:
● read.cash ● noise.cash  ● Medium ● Hive ● Steemit  ●Vocal 
● Minds ● Publish0x ● Twitter  ●Reddit  ● email  ●telegram

Copyright Disclaimer:
Material published in this content, is used for entertainment and educational purposes and falls within the guidelines of fair use. No copyright infringement intended. If you are, or represent, the copyright owner of images used in this article, and have an issue with the use of said material, please notify me.

Don't forget to Subscribe and Like if you enjoyed this article!