[AnimalMuppet]

Maybe because CyberDildonics asked a couple of questions, and you're asking him/her for facts and sources. People don't need facts to ask questions. That's kind of why you ask - to get facts.

You read CyberDildonics' questions as being an attempt to push an opinion (which seems unjustified to me). You might try not assuming the worst about people in the absence of better evidence...

[johnvonneumann]

I'm asking him to back his opinion up because his question was a loaded question:

Question: "Why not just use another crypto-currency?"

Load Question: "Why not just use a crypto-currency that isn't clogged by developers trying to make people use their proprietary service?"

He is applying bias to it from the get go, your comment is a bit strange, asking a question doesn't exempt you from asking honest questions that aren't loaded, you don't enter some realm of sanctity just because you're asking a question. You can ask for further clarity as to what the person is asking before answering it.

[AnimalMuppet]

But the question was about using Bitcoin to back something else. What's the "something else"? It's not Bitcoin. Is it something proprietary? dxhdr (whose post triggered this conversation) doesn't say, but it would almost certainly be more proprietary than Bitcoin.

Why "almost certainly more proprietary than Bitcoin"? Because somebody's using their bitcoin to back something else. That "somebody" creates (and therefore to some degree controls) that "something else".

At that point, CyberDildonics' question isn't loaded. It's a perfectly reasonable question in response to the proposed idea.

And, after all this back and forth, the question remains: Why would I want to use something backed by Bitcoin, when I could just use Bitcoin?