| | Hi Iman,
Actually, the only thing I have found troubling is your consistently referring to the outcome of a TA analysis as wrong when a possibility, pegged as more likely, does not come to pass. If a genetic condition is recessive and each parent has the recessive gene there is a 1 in 4 chance that an offspring will exhibit the recessive trait. If someone says that the offspring is likely to not exhibit the recessive trait, he is not "wrong" if the offspring does.
So your energies are being expended to present an empirical comparison of TA vs TA plus the zen trading quality known as "in tune with the market". And to what end? Can we all be imbued with that quality or do we only experience it vicariously when the Iman is present? I actually think process is more important than results. By sharing what they are seeing and what they are expecting and why, the contributors teach and learn and help each other out. There is a synergy that produces a result that exceeds the sum of the parts. Since most, if not all, are making their own trades, they can use this to determine entry and exit points, pick suitable targets that have logical stops within the individuals risk parameters, etc.
I don't see any reluctance to hear new ideas. Witness the interest in e-wave presentations. But it is a process oriented group and ideas and presentations supported by results but not accompanied by process may be a pleasant diversion, for a while; but are resistant to assimilation. It does not mean they are not valid, just that if you cannot find some segue that lends itself to incorporation, maybe that means that it just doesn't fit.
<<BTW, I am truly impressed with your credentials>> Yea, but I have lousy people skills. C'est la vie.
Best,
Steve |
|
