We are not advancing the “NFT” narrative my man. We are advancing Bitcoin adoption. Sorry it doesn’t look the way you want it to look.
Supporting Julian Assange can come in many different forms. His team is very excited to work with us on our mags and conferences.
What’s in the water over at Bitcoin Magazine…. “WE ARE ADVANCING BITCOIN ADOPTION” 😂 
Doc, we hosted a conference with 300 talks and over 9000 speaker applications. Our batting average is 99%. How about the talks with Jordan Peterson, Glen Greenwald, and Peter Thiel?
Well… agree to disagree on this one CK. You guys are obviously dug in and unwilling to acknowledge the risks of not only advocating for, but participating in ordinals/inscriptions. Yes, you may attract new bitcoiners to the space by auctioning off “rare satoshis”. But what happens when those same people get wrecked because their monke jpeg becomes worthless?
Bitcoin DGAF. But you are using your platform irresponsibly.
You're trying to rationalize your bad actions by the good actions you have taken. Doesn't work that way.
Wait, I'm confused now. You are selling NFTs though? So from an objective prospective, you're advancing both narratives? Seems fair to say. If you're creating special sats and selling them for more, you're advanciing that narrative as well as what it's inscribed on, no? If we're having fair and open discussion, then that seems fair to say.
If you want to make any progress with the die hard bitcoiners, then can you imagine a world where your actions would be seen as advancing both narratives? Not saying it's a bad thing, especially because you seem confident in your decision. But it is technically that, correct? Both narratives?
But because you're confident, you're saying that advancing any narrative is a good narrative for Bitcoin? These are all honest questions. I'm trying to understand.
There is only 1 narrative that narrative is hyperbitcoinization.
Colored coins, NFTs, and now “rare satoshis”. No use case. Artificial scarcity. History is not on your side. 
Okay cool. Thanks for clarifying. You see nfts as part of that path (not separate from) and the main thing is just that we get to hyperbitcoinization. As far as I've always heard, Bitcoin dgaf either and this too is good for Bitcoin. Guess we'll see if those continue to hold true.
And you realize you might mislead some new people or sell sats for way more than they're actually worth to pull some profit for Julian Assange (I love Julian btw) and with your value and moral system, that's okay with you. Just really having to gnaw on this because I myself am conflicted on your choice. I'll drink some coffee and maybe that'll make me wake up to how hyperbitcoinization is worth it at all costs.
To be fair, I don’t believe they have sold the Assange “rare Satoshi”.
Thanks, that is fair. I'm just thinking out loud here because I don't really know where I sit with this. Lots of people have been scammed by NFTs. Bitcoin magazine heralds Bitcoin and is now creating NFTs. It could not be a bad thing, eh? Or it could be a misguided attempt at hyperbitcoinization that will harm more than it helps. It's just hard to know. So I'm glad they stand strong in their conviction and I hope it brings the results they envision.
