Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : PairGain Technologies -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: FirstDiogenes who wrote (34889)	11/24/1999 12:45:00 AM
From: Rainmaker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 36349

Thread, I promise to bed this issue and simply retire to my cubicle as soon as I finish the following. And, I apologize in advance if this may seem boorish. So, if you're turned off by soliloquy, hit the NEXT button now. Otherwise, read on.... Doug R, What? I thought you were having a good time: "I enjoy a good skirmish now and then...lol!" - your words. Then you crawl off to your own thread and whine (yes, WHINE) about your treatment here. Well, you left a bad taste in my mouth and I need to say a few things, even if you don't have the guts to stick around and hear it. You are a classic example of an old ruse: control people by Miracle [a 99% effective trading system], Mystery [a holy text that can't be revealed, except to the elect who make a pilgrimage to your seminars], and Authority [all heretics are excommunicated]. These same techniques are used by circus tent preachers, late night infomercials, and get-rich-quick scam artists the world over. Maybe we'll see you again some sleepless night, telling us all how we can get rich by using 900 numbers? Despite a cordial welcome to this thread, and initial interest in your double-top-secret trading system, you simply refused to explain how you applied even a small part of your system with us. Were you a bit vague? Brother, you were about as clear as Pat Paulsen at a pep rally. This thread isn't as passive as you seem to think. We really do transact ideas here; things are discussed, weighed, argued, and evaluated. The interaction is held among a group of highly schooled individuals - among which are: doctors, physicists, psychologists, scientists, CEOs, bankers, and yes, a simple propellerhead like me. As such, we don't deserve to be treated like children by someone who is quite possibly an inferior. If you are true to your words, I welcome your departure.

To: FirstDiogenes who wrote (34889)	11/24/1999 1:55:00 PM
From: Doug R	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 36349

The short term technical profile of the stock when it hits the high that's used is....how can I say....overcooked Technical profile....not chart profile. Your comment showed that you do not have a propensity toward actually understanding what is said to you before you act on any info. ______________________________________________ Your chart with the MA/"MLR" is wrong. You have a simple linear regression line not a MOVING linear regression line. I explained that it was a MOVING LR. Once again, acting before understanding. ____________________________________________________ BW and they have about that much real application :-) Oh by the way there is an 80% chance it will rain , if the rest of the front moves the way I think it will. If not it will be very dry. CRDoug Simple rudeness Other posts made had only rudeness as their intent... _________________________________________________ That's not what you told Rainmaker. Yesterday, he asked you to "elaborate a bit on the 'conditions' and the modeled output (ie. where do you see PAIR's price in timeframe X?)" You replied: "It's purely a charting technique with no technical criteria (ie MAs, MACD, stochastics, RSI, regression stuff, momentum factors, etc)." Your answer may have applied only to the break of your IL line, but if that's the case, then you didn't answer his question. Today you reverse course again. It's not purely a charting technique, it requires lots of instruction. Oh, brother! It is purely a charting technique. Any reference I made to the technical considerations concerning PAIR were completely separate from the IL stuff. If you actually look at the 2 charts (GTNR and PAIR) I gave as examples (you asked for another example and I gave you one...) you will see the method is EXACTLY the same for both. There's more info in those two examples than you're likely to find about charting technique anywhere on SI. You're just too stilted to allow yourself to get it. The timeframe is different for every stock. It's the price in relation to the lines that gives you the timeframe as the model progresses. _______________________________________________ These are just a few examples of why I will no longer post here. This post is my formal resignation as "Oracle" (more childish crap on that one too). Doug R