No, but I am saying that Saylor played a big role for the Controllers and now they have little use for him, they'd now rather that you buy the ETFs because ETFs allow for better control over Bitcoin's price and volatility. But Saylor, knowingly or unknowingly normalized plebs holding Paper Bitcoin by selling them MSTR shares. Imagine if Larry Fink came out with his ETFs, maybe the plebs would've reacted "Hey, not your keys, not your coins, remember?". However, Saylor became a folk hero in the Bitcoin space and gained almost everyone's trust. It is also a bit convenient that MSTR's stock outperformed basically everyone at the exactly right time 😂 He was the perfect person to usher in the paper Bitcoin era. He is now continuing to claim that "Bitcoin is a SoV, not MoE" because he has a lot of pull with a big audience and he has to be very careful with what he says. The Controllers could easily wreck his company or worse if he gets out of line. I think the whitepaper said "Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System", and not "Bitcoin: Buying stocks from Charismatic salesmen". Most Bitcoiners still don't understand that you can't enforce SoV (the 21 million cap) by not holding your coins, by investing in Bitcoin ETFs (remember GLD?), and by not asking treasury companies for Proof-of-Reserves, etc. Saylor is also trying to align himself with the Controllers by not normalizing Proof-of-Reserves as well. As I said in the post, if MSTR introduces proof-of-reserves, most, if not all treasury companies will need to follow. I am not accusing him of anything, he might've been a useful idiot, however, when you watch his interviews, you see that he's very aware of what he says and he's great at toeing the line. He most likely started as a good, genuine actor in the space, and later on god corrupted, and I can't blame him. If you go against the system, you will inevitably get wrecked. With a big audience like Saylor's, getting wrecked in this context means getting killed. View quoted note →