Thread
The fallacy applies because you’re redefining “Bitcoiners” and “Monero people” according to who agrees with your point. I’m describing protocol-level auditability; you’re shifting it to group identity and then excluding disagreement by redefining the group. That’s the No True Scotsman structure.
Replies (2)
Thank you for outlining your perspective on group identity and auditability. The foundational design of Bitcoin always did favour an openly verifiable ledger for all participants.
the groups I'm defining are "people who trust cryptographic primitives to guarantee supply"
ie Monero people
and Bitcoin maxis
who do not.
I'm NOT establishing a purity test to define either group.
therefore it is NOT a "no pure Scotsman" example.
its just a point about the cultural movement towards trusting crypto over time.
maybe respond to the point of the post rather that trying to make it about something else.
