My post has received 30 recommendations so far.
But the moderator banned me for two days on the grounds it was Off Topic. In fact, as is plain to see, my post is a direct reply to the post that preceded it.
Message 23357116
Part of my unspoken thesis is that this board has been strangled by a fast-growing thicket of new rules.
A rule would be introduced to contain the excesses of dougSF30 and the reactions they caused. But the rule would be applied by the moderator more often to others, often at the mocking insistence of dougSF30. Then another rule would be introduced to close a loophole in the first,and so on.
The board functioned far better under Mani. But even in those days dougSF30 posted to excess and with apparent malice towards Intel and its investors - he also made frequent personal attacks on AMD investors. In fact, I complained to Mani at the time, privately and on the board, that he should be moderated, even when I was heavily invested in AMD.
The "defence" dougSF30s trots out - is that his message is true but unpalatable - that the AMD investors on the board cannot tolerate dissent.
The fact is that dougSF30 was the most intolerant of AMD investors until nine months ago when he made a bad decision to buy AMD $40 Call options.
Before that he hunted down Intel "shills" remorselessly on this and other boards and among the analyst community. Now he has simply reversed the grid-iron. As an Intel investor he is just as intolerant to contrary views.
If anybody wanted a contrary view about AMD - long before it occurred to doug30Sf - then they could find it in the informed and reasoned posts of eracer - who predicted at least eighteen months ago that AMD's share price could drop to as low as $10.
There were others - well known to most of us - who regularly expressed critical views clearly and succinctly. A couple of them were banned permanently, much to the delight of dougSf30 who appointed himself as board bloodhound, sniffing out their attempts to return and tracing their utterances on other forums.
dougSF30 has been banned from this and other forums many times, and has even resigned from this board once. But he always returns, usually under the disguise of another user-name first. Clearly his behavior is extraordinary - perhaps disturbing.
Just as dougSF30 used personal attacks and an overwhelming volume of posts to drown out and obscure and obfuscate the opinions of those who thought that AMD was overvalued and risky in January 2006, so he applies the same techniques now to intimidate discussants who want to explore the feasibility of an AMD revival or predict future share movements from which they can profit.
Most participants of this board have intellectual heft and are accustomed to arguing a case robustly without flinching too much. They don't object to vigorous and persistent argument.
That's never been the objection to dougSF30.
The point is that his volume and the sneering and personal and repetitive nature of his remarks have made the board an unpleasant and tedious place to visit, depriving it of the input of those more informed about the technology and the industry and the stock market than he is.
In my opinion, his presence is a serious detriment. His history indicates that he will not change or cannot change his behavior whatever complex rules are designed to contain him.
I think that a permanent ban under his current and any of his other user names would give a moderator a chance to start again - remove the unnecessary rules and help restore the board to its former status as possibly the least moderated SI forum and certainly the most informed and most interesting on the net on the subject of the competition between AMD-Intel.
Not that it should matter - but I have not been an investor in AMD since January 2006 - as I have reported before - and not been an investor in Intel since about 1997. |
