<<Your logic may impress bears in Alaska, but I am still bored...>>
Nice... now why don't you call me something condescending like "little stevie". Oh wait. By the way, I'll be leaving Alaska in about a month for either New Haven or Harvard Square, will that somehow make my words more important. Typically when people engage in ad hominem it's because they have nothing of substance. You are not an exception in this case.
<<You claim that you don't have requirements for posting, yet you appear to contradict that very claim with your last paragraph. >>
This is laughable. As I explained, I am asking you why you post because I think it's ABSURD that you do and I am giving you the opportunity to explain yourself. I am expecting a compelling argument for why you do simply because I can't imagine why you wouldn't provide one.
<<If, as you have so pathetically stated, >>
This makes your argument more convincing... good job..LOL..
<<Based on your posting history on this thread, you do have some sort of criteria for acceptable posting. >>
Nope. All I have is an expectation that someone posting will have what I consider a rational reasoning for posting. You don't, so I think you are irrational. I find it amazing that you don't attempt to offer a compelling reason in order to convince others that you are a rational person. This has NOTHING to do with any formal rules regarding posting (despite your previous attempt to direct the argument that way).
<<Furthermore, you and your cohorts seem to believe that the primary requirement for posting is a financial interest>>
I have no cohorts. However, financial interest in a stock would be the single most compelling reason, sure. Don't confuse this with it being the only reason.
<<We will never truly know what your real financial interest is in BIGG...>>
True... relevance?
<<What I find ironic, little Stevie, is your persistence>>
Ah yes. Top notch work. Incidentally, I've answered your question. I am truly curious as to what motivates you. I engage you occasionally because I can't help myself. You have a modicum of wit, and occasionally some insight. Although, the more a discussion develops, the more obvious it becomes that you are fairly limited.
<<BTW, you didn't invent that grading scheme little Stevie. >>
Ah yes. As if the first couple times weren't enough. As for the grading scheme, you used the phrase "your words" in your posts, presumably representing possession. I was merely remaining consistent by using the phrase "my grading scheme". It wasn't meant to indicate that I invented it, merely that for the purposes of this discussion it was *mine*, as you indicated previously. Please try to remain consistent in the future.
<<After all, you have made your money with BIGG, right? >>
As of right now, I haven't made any money. I sold 2/3 of my position for 1.5 times the purchase price (roughly) and have the remaining 1/3 of my position.
<<Let me guess... the pool consisted of the Mamma Bear, the Papa Bear and the little baby JW Stevie bear>>
This is intriguing. You've apparently learned that AK has bears. Bravo. And now a baby reference, how many does that make it? That gives me an idea.
<<PS: Did you really write this all by yourself, little Stevie? Or did your poolmates help? lol!!!>>
Nah. They find you terribly boorish. It's an interesting game though. I thought I had you pegged, but I misjudged you. I have no doubt I could have elicited another "In your words", but I tried to do it with class and it back fired. Oh well, I always find that winning something is better when you do it in style.
jw steve |
