Some of you know I'm working on an article about what I believe is REALLY going on with Bitcoin fees, and it's not jpegs.

My dilemma:

I'd like to get my article seen by the people that care about Bitcoin, but also by the morons enabling the bigger scam.

Do I publish on an outlet like Bitcoin Magazine, where both sets of eyeballs might read it?

BM is complicit in the scam, even if unknowingly.

Or do I self-publish on Habla, where I have FULL editorial control, no risk of rug-pull, but likely WAY fewer eyeballs based on my follower count?

I DGAF if I get credit/fame. It's not that awesome of an article anyway. I want people to stop and think, evaluate if they've been fighting the wrong battle.

I have a tentative option to publish somewhere in the middle, like on Parman's blog site.

Thoughtful feedback appreciated.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

I vote self publish, and we'll all help spread the link around on here and on other socials.

I think it would help if you at least had your own Twitter account (if you don’t already) so the original post can be retweeted.

Still do have one. Pondering.

Would it be possible to publish on all 3 to get the most visibility ? Or does one of them need exclusivity ?

Major outlets like BM likely want first or exclusive.

Their SEO value diminishes for example if they've published duplicate content.

If I self-publish AFTER a major outlets, that may work.

This has worked the best in the past to get increased viewership.

Publish to a known media outlet to engage, then self publish and use the socials to spread beyond.

Part of me wants it to be just Bitcoiners until the answers to my questions in the article becomes more clear.

Then we can strike.

But point well taken. Assuming they pick up a "Nobody" author.

If BM is problematic, you could publish on Habla ,Parman and maybe Stackchain magazine ?

My biggest dilemma with BM is principle.

They fueled the problem I want to fix, unapologetically.

It would be fitting to include them in the fix, but it also rubs me the wrong way.

I think you have your answer there. If BM fueled the problem, the same BM whose president boasts about making lots of profit on shitcoins, their interests might not be inline with your article

That's true. Thanks.

I think I've been feeling cognitive dissonance.

I'm an eternal optimist that WANTS them to see the light themselves.

But deep down I KNOW on the whole they won't.

I'd love to have the reach they might provide, but in the end, that's asking permission and centralization of effort.

We grassroots-efforted CBDC awarenesses. We can do this here too, if it has legs.

For added reach, you can also share on twitter if you still have your account, or create a temporary one

Care to give us a hint what you think is happening?

I'll do one better.

Here's the executive summary:

- Bitcoiners are arguing about the wrong enemy.

- Images aren't causing the high fees; BRC-20 shitcoins are.

- This is fueled by VC money, and the BRC-20 payday breaks normal fee-market incentives.

- The problem is getting worse, not better.

- We have ways to dig deeper; let’s work together.

- There are possible “solutions” that don’t break Bitcoin.

I like Rijndael. He's in it for the tech from what I see. Hangs out with some real scummy people sometimes though.

Got a link so I can learn more?

I slept on this. Wasn't aware.

Finding some context clues on DedBird, but I'd love a great explainer by Rijndael himself if anyone has one.

To my understanding Sophon watches the mempool to front run any BRC20 and mints just one of whatever the token is supposed to be.

Habla and then stacker news.

Then Delving Bitcoin.

The most important part: go full send.

Publish it here.

I would publish on Ghost, BM and on Looking Glass Education. BM for the eyeballs, Ghost for censorship resistance and LGE to educate folks in the future about it. Better still write a mini book about it