I am officially bullish on xrp

This is not gish gallop. Why do none of you understand but all misuse the same 5 informal fallacies? I gave you context for its use in product which I clarified as being related to but not core referent to the claim I made. Here is from the link:
>ODL is demand-neutral at level of transaction due to the buy-sell cycle, but not at operational scale. Market maker requirements, burns, reserves, and adoption create demand, making it interaction neutral with deflationary and broad ecosystem-driven demand. At $3.02 (price I originally calculated at, can recalculate if desired on new price, but is really unnecessary to the argument) ODL’s buy-sell cycle reduces net demand to ~993,377 XRP ($3 million) from market maker reserves. Burns (10 XRP = $30.20) and reserves (10,000 XRP = $30,200) persist but have limited immediate impact. Stink’s role (1,000 link = $23,920) remains unchanged-ODL doesn’t affect CCIP’s messaging needs. ODL’s design ensures XRP’s price is more responsive to payment volume, relying on long-term adoption and sentiment, whereas link's value stays capped by messaging.

I am not making appeal to any argument Ripple has made or No payment system can function without liquidity providers holding assets, whether forex or crypto exchanges etc. ODL’s blind bid/ask process relies on market makers’ XRP inventories, inherently creating demand. Ripple’s comment or non-comment on this doesn't change this market reality that is literally inarguable and (being liquidity) the actual core function of the entire market economy, forex etc. Otherwise why would markets have deep liquidity locked for exchange? Lol Ripple were incentivized to not contest the argument of demand neutrality because as far as they are interactionally implicated the direct exchange is demand neutral for the purchaser, deliberately, partially to prevent accusation of being a securities offering in a regulatorily hostile environment. This doesn't change how markets work.

>>60926465
>Burns (10 XRP = $30.20) and reserves (10,000 XRP = $30,200)
the funniest thing about that entire spiel is that the original dude either couldn't do basic math, or didn't understand that the actual amount of xrp in that equation is in drops, which amounts to a very tiny fraction of the actual amount he's trying to use for that calculation

>>60926696
The fact that you think this comes down to a simple miscalculation just shows how taxonomically shallow your understanding is not only of XRP but of monetary ecosystems more broadly because burns and reserves are not isolated transactional events but rather emergent behaviors within a synthetic liquidity framework that Ripple engineered specifically to mimic the elastic properties of legacy FX markets which you’d understand if you had any background in capital flow modeling or liquidity provisioning theory but instead you latch onto a surface-level interpretation of a parenthetical example and imagine you’ve discovered some fatal flaw as if Ripple engineers accidentally misquoted denomination units in a years-long enterprise-facing infrastructure product and didn’t notice because you, an anon on a cartoon stock forum, read a sentence wrong which frankly is the kind of cope-tier projection that comes from people who’ve never once engaged with endogenous money theory or studied how demand persistence arises in hybrid settlement networks and worse than that you’re repeating a fundamentally Keynesian fallacy where value is presumed to be created only in explicit end-user transaction moments rather than emergent from aggregate friction-reduction across the payment stack which is the exact opposite of how ODL operates in praxis since the market makers who pre-position XRP inventory are functionally acting as decentralized liquidity anchors whose demand is not opt-in or discretionary but built into the operational pipeline and scaled proportionally to network throughput, meaning your little “burns are actually in drops” nitpick is not just wrong but laughably irrelevant in the face of XRP’s structurally necessary role in settlement finality and pricing transparency across borders which is what this was actually about.

>>60926297
>>60926299
>>60926465
>>60926696
>>60926736
Literal retard. Ripple's revenue is ALL off-chain. All of the sales they have made since May 2020 have been directly to partners and zero to retail, while Chainlink dumps on you and Sirgay pockets the money. Ripple do not make money on-chain through operator or contract fees. XRP was specifically designed to have no middlemen fee collection or native L1 smart contracts to optimize it as a liquidity/settlement layer. They make money through their payment service, which uses XRP, and objectively
Chainlink sells/distributes more link (relative to its total supply):

~45-50% of 1 billion link (~450-500M tokens) has been sold/distributed via ICO (35% in 2017). Ripple sells less XRP relative to its supply (~20-25%) of 100 billion XRP (~20-25B tokens) sold, mostly via escrow releases (200-500M XRP/month) and ODL partnerships. Ripple sells exclusively to partners and ODL users. CLL just dumps on you. Ripple controls less than half of total supply. Link isn't even 20% sustainable by native revenues. CLL lied about the tokenomics and comingled 2/3 of the entire float after suggesting the operator rewards were ringfenced (and then selling them to fund operations/pilfer) and have been selling directly to retail and dumping on you and eating your savings to make payroll and inflate business and payrolls and... by inflating supply selling directly to you. They have already done a huge share. This isn't whataboutism or tu quoque etc. It is LITERALLY just Chainlink Labs being guilty of fraud and Ripple not but you not undertstanding 101 level information and transmuting ignorance into undeservedly confident accusation because you are as arrogant as you are ignorant and you just assume you are entitled to automatic rightness. You are a low IQ/information person.

>>60926744
The classic Chainlink defense (a mishmash of misguided arrogance and laughable ignorance), you seem to completely ignore the simple fact that Ripple’s revenue is off-chain, built through real partnerships (something Chainlink clearly lacks) while LINK’s entire existence depends on selling more tokens into the market to keep the lights on, (pathetically inflating supply and devaluing the token over time) meanwhile XRP was designed as a liquidity/settlement layer without the need for exploitative middlemen (or useless native smart contracts that only serve to complicate things). Ripple’s business model is straightforward and sustainable, (selling XRP exclusively to institutional partners) while Chainlink has dumped 45-50% of its total supply through its ICO and subsequent sales (to retail), creating an unsustainable token economy based on pure speculation rather than real utility, and let’s not forget how Chainlink’s tokenomics were built on lies, promising a "ring-fenced" operator reward system, only for them to later sell those rewards (to fund their operations and bloated payroll), which is literally a form of fraud disguised as "growth." Ripple, on the other hand, controls less than half of the total XRP supply, ensuring a more stable long-term outlook (unlike Chainlink which will continue to dilute its token value to fund payrolls and business expansion that serves no one but the insiders). Chainlink isn’t even close to being self-sustaining on native revenues (their entire business model relies on constant dumping), and you, of course, completely miss the point, (probably because you’re too busy justifying your delusions) thinking arrogance equals accuracy while refusing to face the objective facts, your argument is nothing but low IQ rationalization, unable to grasp even the most basic principles of tokenomics or market structure, proving only that you’re too emotionally invested to see the glaring flaws in your precious LINK.

>>60926465
gish gallop
>>60926736
gish gallop
>>60926744
gish gallop
>>60926812
gish gallop

>>60926837
The biepum brainfart response , a true classic after being called out for his infantile reasoning. Kek baggie

File: 1757508871508569.png (55 KB, 316x332)

55 KB PNG

>>60927740