The BTC community is known for its linguistic approach compared to camps like BCH and BSV. While BCH and BSV are remembered for espousing their feature benefits, BTC is known for its quick wins, stories of overnight millionaires, and linguistics around "HODL", "when moon", or "have fun staying poor." Whether "right" or "wrong", the appeal of BTC is its ability to make money quickly, which is no different from buying a lottery ticket.

The distinction in marketing between BTC and its competitors is how Steve Jobs separated Apple from incumbents like Microsoft. Both exist but in different capacities now. If you wonder why BTC wins the culture war, even if its tech is stifled, it's because of this fundamental.

Protocols are different from product brands, and in the long run, the name might not matter as much. Just like TCP/IP doesn’t matter to users in the context of using websites, we’re seeing this already in the #NFT space, which is encouraging.

The only way others can overcome the momentum and inertia of BTC is if there’s a serious technical flaw that causes many to lose lots of money, instantly. That, or if governments decide to outlaw it overnight. Both possible scenarios. Alternatively, if enough people make more money using alternatives through the apps being built themselves, such users may not care which #blockchain tech they’re using. They’ll be caring more about how it benefits them.

BTC's "digital gold" narrative has overtaken its image as "boring plumbing". Therefore, the focus should be on selling "the dream", but a dream that supersedes getting-rich-quick. The question now is what this is for camps like BSV.