speaking of libertarians, Is anyone actively on their site promoting? I'd check the MEW thread but I'll be damned if I'm going to pay to give free marketing idea's.

I limited the collective which I represent to 0.1% median mean per capita.  Whether you consider that a yes or a no is up to you.

make me.

edit:  this is the xmr speculation thread. so if you can't take it..

yeah. hope there's no panic sell tho as this is all looking like a false break out.

Your pretty high strung for a PotHead. You should try a chill pill.

My observations:

1. The rise was with a higher volume than the corresponding fall.

Conclusion: the buyers were the suckers (short-term at least). Despite seemingly no resistance for the rise, there has been even less resistance for the fall.

2. Price is right, volume could be faked, walls can be anything.

The old wisdom is that only a trade that is registered for you, means anything. All else could be smoke and mirrors. And often is.

3. My realistic (trying to be as little wishful as possible) estimate of the short-term (30 days) bottoming:

* 30% - a new low is reached below 00091
* 40% - double bottom formed in 00100 area as a long process
* 30% - the bottom is higher (00110-00133) and then turns up (uptrend in force and this being only a Fib correction)

4. My realistic (trying not to forget the positive black swans) estimate of the medium-term (90 days) upside:

* 10% - return to the trading range of 00350 or higher
* 20% - going over 00200 and staying there
* 40% - staying above 00100
* 30% - downtrend continuing below 00100, incl coin abandoned etc. cases

Using bottom connectors as pivot lines, I see ~140k and 124k-127k as likely up-turning zones in case of a continued downward.  Anything over 160 seems more likely to end up in a confirmation of the upward breakout.  Sentiment seems pretty bearish, which tends to make the upside breakout more likely.  If you really want to make bank on cheap coins, you have to be willing to disgorge in the 160k region, or else add capital.  Given such a choice, I have always added capital, but now I am at my moral holding limit, so I need to re-evaluate.  Should I add capital temporarily, disgorge, or abstain?  Disgorging is too risky for me, of that I am sure.  The upward price-chase is very damaging to average cost.

I might have used "rational" in place of "moral".  My underlying thought is that a set of core holders which is inadequate to bootstrap an economy is unlikely to survive an NDE, and in the long-term, extreme concentration is an impediment to adoption -- a premise which your NDE post certainly brings into question.

While I remain confident in the technical and structural superiority of XMR relative to its present competition, an NDE which coincided with the introduction of a superior alternative would end in a DE.  An NDE takes time to play out, and that is time during which the opportunity exists for a superior alternative to emerge (since liquidity is a component of the fitness function).

You would like to convince me to add capital in case of a downturn, because you don't have any objection to me increasing risk (since it is not your risk, so it off-loads your risk).  That's cool.  But I'm not convinced that it is healthy for the coin.  The health of the coin is a force multiplier.

In the end, if it gets too cheap, I won't be able to resist the urge to offer a put.  I know that.  I would prefer a scenario in which I never increase past my "moral" cum estimated "rational" limits, but a temporary surplus which ends up reducing my average cost is totally fine with me under all constructions.

I venture that almost everybody here is a ballsy risk-taker who presses their limits.  Most of us will suffer for it (but in very limited, almost ludicrous, sense of "suffering", on the broad human scale), and a few will bank big-time.  My prayer is that the good guys fall mainly in the latter camp.