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 : Bob Brinker: Market Savant & Radio Host -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Math Junkie who wrote (12682)	3/2/2001 4:20:33 PM
From: geode00	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42834

Richard, it makes sense to take the source into consideration. If you want people to take you more seriously, then you need to have better arguments. You're behind the eight ball here. In that situation, jumping up and down and yelling that you're right isn't going to help. Most of us are just here to figure out how to fix the Bob-advised fiasco that many find themselves in. Bob is ZERO help which is amazing considering that people PAY for his advice. Well, let's say PAID for those who cancelled the abyssmal Marketimer and are apparently getting at least some of their money back. Therefore, why don't you present more arguable points for debate?

To: Math Junkie who wrote (12682)	3/2/2001 5:24:22 PM
From: Rillinois	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42834

Richard Palm, Re: Ad hominem arguments are INVALID! Agreed. And so are red herrings. Re: There is NO ONE, not one single person, who has never gotten a fact wrong. Not me, not Rillinois... Speak for yourself. I am very careful to research my facts before I post information. I challenge you to find anything that I have posted as a fact that is erroneous. Re: So can we please stick to the issues? I believe anything Bob Brinker related is open field. Re: My credibility, Rillinois' credibility, geode's credibility, etc. are IRRELEVANT. Are you high? How can credibility be irrelevant? Re: The only thing that matters is whether the assertions of fact are capable of verification. Some things aren't verifiable. (ie: what Bob may have said on the radio before archives on the internet, what may have been written in his newsletter before someone subscribed,...) This is why credibility is relevant. Re: By that I mean that it is possible to check it via independent sources. Not everyone has access to independent sources. (ie: a library that has back issues going back x years, tapes of old radio programs, notes from Bob's appearances at various charity events,...) Again this is why credibility is relevant. Re: This is how we can learn from each other: by challenging each other's assumptions, checking each other's facts, and examining each other's logic. While there is truth to what you are saying, some people hide behind this idea in order to cause commotion and confusion. Re: But trying to shout each other down every time somebody admits to an error is NOT WORKING. First of all, not many people admit to errors, which is part of the problem. And second, I believe exposing liars and those that have agendas to perpetuate lies works very well. Best Regards. Rillinois