Jump to content

toobhunter

Member
  • Content Count

    75
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About toobhunter

  • Rank
    Regular

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. "You could have a logical argument if you stopped worrying about the total number of XRP and instead simply concentrated on proportionality of ownership." Do you really not understand that Ripple burning a portion of their XRP addresses not one but both of these issues? Having this asynchronous convo is frustrating because you seem to dance around issues. If supply has absolutely no bearing on price, then by your logic there could just be 1 BTC or 1 XRP, right? Or there could be 100 trillion in your eyes. I think you're trying to save your argument but sound foolish. And if you disagree with the notion that there could be only 1 BTC or 1 XRP (or 100 trillion of both), then please explain why. What you will discover is some form of "its too unwieldy" or "it doesnt make sense." And therein lies my point. So does the current 100B number and, again, Ripple's large ownership %.
  2. Again, Ripple doesn't have to do anything. In my view, them burning a portion of their XRP would alleviate both their large % of holdings as well as total outstanding. You don't believe total supply impacts investment / speculation, but you are discounting human psychology. Does somebody want to own 0.00000000000000001 of a BTC? Probably not many people.
  3. I also don't believe we / I have a "right" to that property. Its their's and they can do as they please. But I think you are asking the wrong question. The better question should now be..."what is the right supply of XRP under the current circumstances and our strategy?" Would Ripple rather have a smaller piece of a bigger pie or a bigger piece of a small pie?
  4. Total BS. The supply issue can be addressed / resolved / fixed. Everyone who views it as "whats done is done" lacks a spine and creativity.
  5. You're basically saying two things: 1) supply doesn't impact investment / speculation and 2) that Ripple nailed the perfect amount of 100B XRP to mint in 2012 (that its not possible they may not have made the perfect call in regards to supply) You're absolutey saying those two things so even though I may very well be wrong (and Ripple / XRP succeeds without burning any XRP - I concede its still possible) you're reasoning makes no sense.
  6. I want you to consider how the founders of Ripple came up with the number 100B in 2012. You can picture them sitting around a room...3-5 guys totally spit balling the number 100B. Some back of the envelope calculations. They have no idea what the strategy for Ripple or XRP will be. As you (might) know, they have pivoted their strategy numerous time. Do you actually think the 100B number is some scientifically concocted perfect number for what they are doing?!?! Haha, get real! I personally know MANY people that would get into XRP if the supply wasn't so enormous. Supply has an enormous impact on investment and speculation. For you to say otherwise is 1000% laughable. The market cap would increase...no doubt. Go back to your calculator and try again.
  7. "to be the true world reserve currency worth trillions"?? who is the one making themself look silly? How many times has Ripple said themselves they don't see fiat currency going away? I'm sure you've been in crypto for at least 3 months. i don't prefer arguing over a message board but you don't want to discuss and instead opted for throwing insults around. of course i think the dollar value would be affected...why else would i have suggested they burn a portion. i agree with you on one thing...not worth continuing this discussion with you.
  8. You still don't seem to understand..."how would such an action benefit Ripple?" You realize that the decreased supply would increase price and thus Ripple wouldn't lose anything, right? Ripple is nearly 8 years old. It has only distributed ~43B XRP. They've made tons of mistakes by "gifting" founders WAAAYY too much XRP. Most of the blockchain community despises them. They are dumping XRP into the ecosystem keeping the price down. You know, their chance to win has a finite runway. If they don't start getting some big wins and traction for XRP, it will go to 0. Maybe they can do it without burning XRP. I'm sure there is lots the community doesn't know about whats going on behind the scenes. But for you to view burning XRP as a "nonsensical" option by people who just want to get rich the the expense of Ripple is the real nonsensical view. Just so you know, I'm not some new XRP holder that wants to get rich in a flash. I bought my first XRP in late 2013 (I can sign a transaction from that wallet
  9. Yes, I did...you aren't thinking this through. I'd be happy to have a conversation with you to discuss if you aren't getting it. Discussions are better than this asychronous communication...just DM me if you want.
  10. did you consider that XRP is nearly infinitely divisible before you posted that??
  11. I understand the snarkiness response but the obvious answer is that my stack wouldn't meaningfully lessen the supply. Everyone else's answer that "100B won't be enough supply if Ripple succeeds" also falls short since XRP is nearly infinitely divisible.
  12. When does it make sense for Ripple to just burn a portion of their XRP? On the one hand, they lose that amount of XRP...on the other hand the supply goes down and price goes up. Seems like 100B is too much supply anyway.
  13. You're accusing me of something really nasty and you don't even know what signing a transaction means. Believe me, I'm now done with you.
  14. Go to Bithomp and find a public key with 1B XRP in it....good luck hacking it
  15. Right, so you think providing public key would expose you somehow? There's a reason why early adopters are gone from this forum...the lack of knowledge is staggering.
×
×
  • Create New...