[zepto]

Ah. I was just agreeing to the part about incentives. Not to the claim that it was a pyramid scheme. Sorry for my part in not clearing up the ambiguity present in your question. I shouldn’t have quoted the whole paragraph. This would have gone better if you had asked for clarification instead of making that assumption.

>> I understand that what people think of Bitcoin is of great importance to you

> Sure isn't.

Ok.

> Weird shift to a personal attack, but what else do you have left after failing so badly?

You seemed to care about what people think of Bitcoin. Now you say you don’t. I’m surprised given the level of zeal you are displaying.

I’m curious why would you take it as a personal attack to point out that you care about Bitcoin?

[xqyf]

Everyone that owns (is "enrolled" in) AAPL is "incentivized to get other people to buy" Apple products, just like BTC. These were the only 2 reasons you've ever given for why BTC is a "pyramid scheme".

You've said that both apply to Apple. So Apple is a "pyramid scheme" right? Or does the No True Pyramid Scheme fallacy mean Apple is excluded?

Is there a reason you can't explain the difference between pyramid schemes, Ponzi schemes, other MLM schemes and market manipulation? The most reasonable guess would be that you don't understand the difference.

This is not an argumentum ad hominiem, it's an explanation for why you're so wrong, and why BTC's not a pyramid scheme.

> I’m curious why would you take it as a personal attack

We're discussing BTC, not me. It’s easier to discuss this if you stay away from ad hominem.