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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Anthony @ Equity Investigations, Dear Anthony, -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mama Bear who wrote (54708)	4/18/2000 9:44:00 AM
From: Dale Baker	Respond to of 122087

I agree with your points entirely; but plenty of folks both long and short go WAY out of their way to create an atmosphere that is not a civilized society. So complaints ring pretty hollow amidst all the !!!!, bold, italics, caps, etc. Just making a general point about the level of discourse on SI these days.

To: Mama Bear who wrote (54708)	4/18/2000 6:34:00 PM
From: scott_jiminez	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 122087

Perhaps you are referring to my posts, Barb. You say, '...it is plain silly the way some folks on SI attempt to belittle good calls as bad calls, and I'm just chronicling the various excuses used to discount good trading calls.' I couldn't agree with you more. My original post on this thread concerned a trade Tony made in January that simply did not meet your criteria. He was just plain lucky to catch Ariad on the two days in January when it retreated....in the midst of a run from $1 to $48. He certainly did not make a good call since a) the stock was not at a turning point and b) he really knows nothing about the firm or its science. The entire point of that original post was not mentioned when you claim 'folks on SI belittle good calls...'. To remind you - the article about Tony in Wired never mentioned that within days of his so-called 'good trading call' ARIA had gone up substantially. Thus the article was unquestionably biased to have Tony appear more insightful than he really is. If the article in Wired had mentioned ARIA's performance subsequent to Tony's trade, if it had made it clear that a truly savvy investor would have achieved a substantially greater return if they would have held ARIA long immediately following Tony's trade, then you would have never heard a peep from me. Because then the article would then have presented a BALANCED picture of Tony's trades....revealing that there was more (or less!) to the story than Tony's perspective alone. Now that's what I consider '...good sportsmanship [in a] civilized society.'