Not kidding.
Congrats. I believe it's the most well-read libertarian blog with a single author (and probably 2nd overall, only after the LRC blog).
Marko:I believe it's the most well-read libertarian blog with a single author (and probably 2nd overall, only after the LRC blog).
Depends on what you consider "blog", and how much leeway you're willing to give with "single author". I'd say at least a good 15-20% of EPJ content is openly attributed to someone else. (The OP being a perfect example.)
http://toplibertarian.com/websites/compete_ranking/
Cool
And, that insult Peter Surda threw at Smiling Dave seems even less clever now.
read it in context. bob wenzel is an old boring nobody.
Damn. -1 for me.
Hey. Would an old boring nobody given an epic speech at the Federal Reserve?
I rest my case.
Ah, the old one-two.
Finish him.
congrats
"As in a kaleidoscope, the constellation of forces operating in the system as a whole is ever changing." - Ludwig Lachmann
"When A Man Dies A World Goes Out of Existence" - GLS Shackle
Nice Job SD!
The Anarch is to the Anarchist what the Monarch is to the Monarchist. -Ernst Jünger
I planned on continuing my self imposed silence [lest I crow at people losing 60% of their money in the latest bitcoin fiasco], but it would be ungracious not to acknowledge the kind congratulations from all of you.
Thank you very much.
My humble blog
It's easy to refute an argument if you first misrepresent it. William Keizer
On Wenzel:
https://www.facebook.com/nskinsella/posts/609032629126694
http://chrislbecker.com/2013/04/15/who-the-hell-is-robert-wenzel-from-economicpolicyjournal-com-really/
Vanitas Nomen: And, that insult Peter Surda threw at Smiling Dave seems even less clever now.
I don't know what sort of weird authority fallacy this is, but just FYI, I've not only been quoted/republished on blogs, but have been quoted in magazines, radio, there are interviews with me on youtube, I lecture about Bitcoin, am being invited into conferences and I've been filmed for the Bitcoin Documentary. And I do this in three languages I might add.
Surda,
So what? Do you really not understand why he thinks your comment is less clever now? I can't see the relevance your "accomplishments" have to the point he was making.
Peter Šurda:I don't know what sort of weird authority fallacy this is, but just FYI, I've not only been quoted/republished on blogs, but have been quoted in magazines, radio, there are interviews with me on youtube, I lecture about Bitcoin, am being invited into conferences and I've been filmed for the Bitcoin Documentary.
In addition to your comment being less clever (which, I admittedly did laugh out loud when I originally read it), I'm sorry to say, this list isn't exactly that impressive either...
And I do this in three languages I might add.
I'll grant you this is pretty cool.
"I don't know what sort of weird authority fallacy this is, but just FYI, I've not only been quoted/republished on blogs, but have been quoted in magazines, radio, there are interviews with me on youtube, I lecture about Bitcoin, am being invited into conferences and I've been filmed for the Bitcoin Documentary. And I do this in three languages I might add."
You look like a whiny bitch trying to fool people into falling for an authority fallacy by talking like that when it has nothing to do with the subject...
Your comment looks less clever because someone from a well-respected website apparently reads Dave's blog.
Also, I'm not exactly Dave's #1 fan and I laughed at your post.
Neodoxy: Also, I'm not exactly Dave's #1 fan and I laughed at your post.
I couldn't tell.
I know Gotlucky, it might seem like Dave and I are just two peas in a pod enjoying jokes over some cold beers, but over the years rifts just emerged between us. An economic disagreement here and there just turned into some bad blood between us. It's a shame really.
I don't understand the comments.
Smiling Dave essentially had said that its's entirely irrelevant how many people actually use Bitcoin as long as he arbitrarily decides that it's not enough, and that his own judgement preempts all the empirical data as well as anecdotal evidence. He did this several times, when I provided data about velocity of Bitcoin, about its usage in online gambling and so on.
So I made an equally absurd analogy, that no matter who reads Smiling Dave's blog, as long as I arbitrarily decide that's not enough, he is fraud and must collapse. My argument wasn't that empirically, noone reads Smiling Dave's blog, but the absurdity of elevating arbitrary judgement into an argument..
Fair enough. I don't think people understood that. Your comment is more widely known from Malachi's signature.
Peter Šurda: Smiling Dave essentially had said that its's entirely irrelevant how many people actually use Bitcoin as long as he arbitrarily decides that it's not enough, and that his own judgement preempts all the empirical data as well as anecdotal evidence. He did this several times, when I provided data about velocity of Bitcoin, about its usage in online gambling and so on. So I made an equally absurd analogy, that no matter who reads Smiling Dave's blog, as long as I arbitrarily decide that's not enough, he is fraud and must collapse. My argument wasn't that empirically, noone reads Smiling Dave's blog, but the absurdity of elevating arbitrary judgement into an argument..
...However, I still stand by my point that all those accolades you listed have been easily replicated by people with literally no expertise whatsoever. (Seriously, just read some of the things Holiday was able to do.) So while they may sound good on a bio page, they're not altogether that impressive.
Smiling Dave: 1. Nobody is actually buying anything with bitcoins.
1. Nobody is actually buying anything with bitcoins.
Peter Surda: Nobody is actually reading your blog. The five people are irrelevant (I arbitrarily decided a threshold). According to your own logic, you are a fraud and must collapse.
Nobody is actually reading your blog. The five people are irrelevant (I arbitrarily decided a threshold). According to your own logic, you are a fraud and must collapse.
Source.
Perhaps there is a different insult people are referring to.
it only became an insult because of my cyber bullying, abridging ways. next sig is coming asap.
New sig SUUUUCCKKS
^
What he said. I want more cyber bullying.
and whats my incentive for listening to you two idiots? you probably didnt even get the reference because the closest you pukes ever got to serving your country was sitting down to watch <i>Apocalypse Now</i> and you couldnt finish it! thats desertion, and I should have you flensed.
/approve
besides, what am I supposed to sign my posts with? "Malachi the Martian"?
Something that doesn't suck is usually considered appropriate.
you think heart of darkness sucks?
John James: ...However, I still stand by my point that all those accolades you listed have been easily replicated by people with literally no expertise whatsoever. (Seriously, just read some of the things Holiday was able to do.) So while they may sound good on a bio page, they're not altogether that impressive.
You're right John, I didn't originally understand what the actual issue was, I guess yesterday was one of my stupid days. It dawned on me today. Also, the pictures you provide are really worth more than a thousand words.
"you think heart of darkness sucks?"
No, just your signatuer. Have you read heart of darkness, by the way?
not in about 15 million years
Go read a leather bound book, old man.
you know what, I think I will.
ps- uncle joe had foreknowledge.