To All:
A hearty amen to Paul's remarks vis the importance of civility (and a touch of humility) on these threads.
For me, there are two important contributions to my thinking about my Valence investment that come from this thread.
First, it serves as a conduit for new information. God bless those who are out there surfing the net for news and posting their findings! God bless too those who report the rumors, the odd dustups such as Red Chip, and all the rest of it. Otherwise I would never have heard about such tidbits as a prospective competitor in Korea or help-wanted ads in Ireland or the latest thinking about the demand for lith-poly in the trade journals, or whatever. None of us could ever have had this kind of information in this timely way without the thread -- which is to say, without the willingness of others to find and share the information. I can't help but think that this willingness is slowly undermined when the thread drifts into a cacophony of abuse and recriminations. Speaking for myself -- but probably many others too -- I would never hang around any other social setting where this was the tone of the conversation because it offends and bores me. I have to think there is an inverse correlation between rude incivility and participation -- and hence the supply of information.
Second, this thread provides enormously valuable discussion of the information. It helps me weigh the information by sorting probable fact from probable fiction and distinguishing the more relevant from the less relevant, and it helps me integrate the results into my prior thinking. Now, since I'm not stupid I can do much of this for myself -- but I also learned long ago that two heads are better than one for these purposes, and three are better than two as four are better than three. Different people see the same thing from different angles, and their different perspectives often help me see the thing in a new light which I find valuable but which I would never have discovered on my own. This process, however, depends on the willingness of everyone to participate, and that willingness depends at least in part on the process being pleasant and productive. Again, I have to think there is an inverse correlation between rude incivility and participation -- and hence the supply of discussion.
In brief, the thread is valuable only in so far as there is participation, and there is participation only in so far as it is pleasant, and it is pleasant only in so far as it is civil. No one stays around when it just gets them a beating.
To illustrate: A year or two ago there was a frequent participant who evidently was an actual engineer within the battery industry and who posted what seemed to be accurate information about the characteristics, technology, and manufacturing of batteries in all their forms. It gave me great comfort to think there was at least one competent technical person involved directly in the battery business participating in the thread. Unfortunately, his (her ?) comments about Valence and lith-poly, which tended to be on the skeptical side, brought him such incredible, almost savage, personal attacks that he announced that he was leaving the thread -- and he did. Fortunately, recently he has returned with periodic comments, but I have to think that his long absence cost some of us considerable $$$ by holding too long or buying too early last fall. Incivility has consequences.
Finally, for those who cannot resist taking a shot at someone, or replying in kind, let me suggest a combat technique which may help relieve frustration without doing too much damage. Use the gentle, ironic, humorous, understated sarcasm that you might with your loved ones. Make it a gentle tease, not hurtful. Aim it at the comment, not the person; the sin, not the sinner. Write it with a twinkle in you eye, and double-check it before posting. And be a little humble in the process; none of us know everything about everything -- or anything. I promise to try to live by this prescription; please forgive me if I slip. My apologies in advance; more to follow afterward. (I am thinking here of my "challenge" post to Mark Visnic. I apologize to Mark for the "somewhat self-congratulatory" remark.) |
