You are right and I remember it well, but the flaw in this analogy was that he wasn't saying Monero is crap and patently he doesn't (and we don't) think so. He was saying the likes of 'forthcoming announcements' (rather than working on good tech) is just crap - and to not expect this from him.
I get it, though I grant you that he could have made the point some other way given that hundreds of millions of dollars are involved.
Could he have though? I've seen this sentiment a lot since the troll job went down, but what evidence is there to support it?
He's said since day 1 that markets are irrational and don't get caught up in the pumpers games. To trust the tech not the personalities.
And yet still people are just here to ride the pumps. They don't care about the fundamentals. As evidenced by his "troll". If he could have gotten his message across some other way, well then this pump wouldn't have been as crazy as it was. By the very act that it happened it proves that this was the only way to really make his point.
A cryptocurrencies value is not in the personalities behind it. It is not in the pump potential. It is in the tech, plain and simple. People can be coerced, they can be manipulative, but the code doesn't lie.
I don't think you - read my posts back. I have no problem with him saying it. But saying in advance there was an announcement coming was a tease. He must have known it would affect price. It didn't bother me overly he said it - I even respect it, but doing it as the punchline of a joke has not exactly gone down well, and since he must have known it would not, it was perhaps a little reckless.
TLDR?
The message was fine, it is reasonably valid to question the delivery of it.
That's all - spilled milk now.
