[verdverm]

You haven't clearly replied to the scenario I presented and have rather used this cash analogy (and idea that if I don't address cash than the question is invalid) to continually deflect from from having to answer the original question and how it applies to cryptocurrency.

Cash is a bad analogy because it is the only widely used currency, it defines what we mean by currency, and it has always been a part of modern history in some form. Cryptocurrency has fundamental differences from a digital, public, immutable ledger.

So if you'd like to get back to the original questions, I'd be happy to continue this discussion.

However if your only defense for cryptocurrency is "cash does it too so we don't have to talk about it" then we can stop here.

[aspenmayer]

I’m not advocating for or defending cryptocurrency. I’m asking questions to clarify what it is you are asking. I don’t see why you think I am deflecting. Asking questions is as old as the Socratic method.

If you don’t think analogies to cash are a good answer to your questions, please restate your question. I’m not using cash as an analogy, I’m using it as a counter-example in the monetary marketplace that proves that different monetary instruments have different properties, some of which are inherent to the medium of exchange. I want to know why you think cash isn’t a good answer to your questions. I also am curious why you think cryptocurrency is a bad answer to your questions, if indeed you do.

[verdverm]

as expected...

I asked a question about how an immutable ledger, with public consensus, deals with the reversal transactions as ordered by the rule of law. Do you have an answer for that?