I have made no secret of my fascination with the people who inhabit places like bitcointalk.org and /r/bitcoin. These two places dominate discussion regarding bitcoin, and aside from the obvious similarity that they are ruled, sorry, moderated by Theymos, the other noticeable similarity is that the constituent demographic tends to be identical. Because the audiences are the same, posts that attract the most attention tend to cater to that demographic: young, male, libertarian, tech-savvy, angry at “the system.” Whoever has written the most attractive sermon basks in the replies of “you get it,” as though believers are privy to a higher understanding of the world and how the world “really” works. What side effects does this have on the discussion, though?
For starters, it creates an echo chamber. Only positive views on bitcoin receive serious attention. Authors who support bitcoin receive praise, which is logical. If a group likes something, they’ll promote others who like it too. This trend becomes illogical when writers promote increasingly radical and unlikely scenarios