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 : Dell Technologies Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: GVTucker who wrote (160489)	9/8/2000 1:54:00 PM
From: D.J.Smyth	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 176387

Tucker, re longs/shorts a) All men are liars all the time b) some men are liars all of the time c) some men are liars some of the time d) No man is a liar all of the time or a) some shorts are liars all of the time b) some shorts are liars all of the time c) some shorts are liars some of the time d) no short is a liar all of the time it's the b) and c) categories that longs have problems with. the a) and d) categories are absolutely NOT true, therefore, only b) and c) apply. Any short who holds to "d" is automatically a liar. if I as a long contain "hope" toward the future, and therefore am long, does not that "hope" wash away much of the "greed" proclivity toward b) and c)? this is probably a dumb question. but, when WallStreet created the category of the "short trader", did they not basically intensify the human struggle between "despair", "lying" and "hope"? in other words, creation of the "short" category was equivalent to commanding that each time you take a crap, you must now crap according to the format of diahrea. short trading lends itself to despair, thefore lying. intensified "hope" lends itself toward the struggle of intensified truth. (Kirkegaard) it's hard to appreciate a neighbor who stands over you and your wife with a knife while your trying to enjoy consensual sex. many large traders short only because they sense weakness. formulate a position of "truth" based on that last statement (you can always break a bone in order that it heal and become stronger, but destruction in and of itself carries no nobility). i think the only viable position formulation you can arrive at regarding that last statement is "there is no truth". and this is a known crock.