Thank you for your PM, Duray. Here are a few lines I thought I'd take the time to address:
I see we're still in personal attack mode.
We?
Message 16200275
After your last PM to me, in which you asked me to apologize, I hadn't posted a thing to you. This was exclusively your initiation, pal.
Would you have it that I not respond? Wait; don't answer that.
I may not know the technical details of the market as well as you, since you've made it your life's work, from what I gather.
I don't begrudge or dress down anyone for simply not having a particular body of knowledge anymore than I'd like to be called an idiot for not being a doctor, or a lawyer, or an aircraft mechanic.
However, when the words become accusatory, or there is a particularly noteworthy arrogance to the other poster's message - which I admit is quite hard to discern - then, I take it up a notch. Silly, I know, and sometimes a bit overwrought. Call me a New Yorker.
I make mistakes sometimes, as well. It happens. If you follow my posts for long enough, you're sure to find some. But I attempt to temper my posts by - as in my post to Mark Davis last night - saying what I feel, which is: not that any particular violation is impossible, but that in many cases, it's not the first thing that would come to my mind.
Would you be surprised to hear that I value cynicism?
We're both right, of course. But simply coming at this game from a different perspective.
I don't think we're both correct, but I am sure that we're operating out of different core experiences. As for conspiracy theories, well, you know where I stand. I think.
On the other hand, it's patently obvious, moreover acceptable, that you approach things from a more hands-on, interventionist perspective than I do, and, well - that's legit. It boils down to realism and idealism, I guess.
Finally, it is kinda fun to jerk your chain, LPS5. Why you don't put me on "ignore" is beyond me.
Ah, okay. So this post (again)...
Message 16200275
...was just to jerk my chain? OK, I can deal with that. For a minute there, I thought you were seriously suggesting that those terms describe me ;-)
And why would I put you on ignore? You've asked me this twice now, guy.
There are lots of folks on SI (well, there used to be) whom have little of substance to offer, and that is sometimes the best substance to absorb. I learn a lot from folks, not only in a qualitative sense, but also from their spasms of illogic. A great place to see that is on the Yahoo message boards. Whew - I'd never post there, but I do check it out from time to time. It's amazing, from any number of perspectives.
Besides, Duray...your demonstrated propensity for misrepresentation makes you someone to be watched, not ignored, by any means! :)
I'd think that the fact that you can become so emotional is maladaptive in your line of work.
Reading into someone's posts is usually difficult...unless, of course, you're looking at some of the hotly contested Yahoo message boards, in which posters tones are uniquely and exquisitely textured by capital letters, exclamation points, obscenities and the like. (There seems to be an inverse relationship between the price of a stock and the emotion demonstrated in posts, incidentally. Imagine that.)
As in the original "program trading" message, make no mistake: I'm not emotional; at least, not with regard to message board posts. I write for effect; I don't affectedly write.
And I'd add that being emotional is not, per se, what kills traders. What does weed out traders is not recognizing that tendency and allowing such to seep into your trading. Know thyself, and brother, you can be of almost any emotional mix in the trading game.
How's all that getcha? :)
LP. |
