I was wandering if I am a cultist

[Anonymous No.12041369]

A person is a cultist if there is no argument that can convince them that they are wrong.

I asked myself: Am I a cultist? And the answer is no. I can imagine a scenario in which someone convinces me that there was something that I haven't thought of and BTC will work eventually as the actual bitcoin should or BSV was really not an attack but a way to save bitcoin.

Right now it's obvious for me that iit was not. I did the math (I'm quite good at math). I've read whatever I could, I've learned a lot. BCH is the actual bitcoin and people said many times, that bitcoin is dead. But it never is. Different name, the same entity. It's better than ever.

[Anonymous No.12041408]

>>12041369
BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD!

[Anonymous No.12041429]

Bitman ABCash (BCH) is not Bitcoin as it does not follow NC but instead relies on centralized checkpoints. Blockstream Coin (BTC) is not Bitcoin because of SegShit. If SHA256 is required, then only one Bitcoin remains (BSV)

[Anonymous No.12041541]

>>12041429
>Bitman ABCash (BCH) is not Bitcoin as it does not follow NC but instead relies on centralized checkpoints.
>It doesn't follow scripture, therefore it's not bitcoin
Okay. But is it worse or better than BSV and why?

[Anonymous No.12041616]

>>12041369
You are not a cultist.
You are correct.

[Anonymous No.12041627]

>>12041429
>>12041541

[Anonymous No.12041802]

>>12041541
Of course BSV is better, fucking Satoshi supports it. BCH only exists to serve Jihan's narrow interests

[Anonymous No.12041825]

>>12041802
That fat ugly fuck is not Satoshi

[Anonymous No.12041908]

>>12041825
Yes he is

[Anonymous No.12042072]

>>12041908