[sebastien_b]

So why not simply say "Bitcoin skeptics" instead?

I had never heard of Bridgewater; I had no opinion about them either way. Was more than willing to read up on their "thoughts on Bitcoin". But immediately going down that hole with such a characterization will not encourage me to engage or evaluate their thoughts objectively. Had they used 'skeptics' I certainly would have kept reading (though I suspect there's probably half a dozen or more similar characterizations in the text).

You can call it an emotional response on my part if you want (I don't see it that way), but I'd counter their own characterization shows emotional aspects on their part as well.

[solosoyokaze]

Because "Bitcoin skeptics" isn't funny or entertaining writing? I'm sure the author knows what tone works for their audience. Not everyone wants the completely antiseptic take.

[sebastien_b]

Fair enough - I'm obviously not part the intended audience, and based on the comments here, he sounds a bit like a Jim Cramer type, so I can see why that might be 'his style'.