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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Strictly: Drilling and oil-field services -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: cnyndwllr who wrote (94546)	11/25/2001 11:28:50 PM
From: SliderOnTheBlack	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 95453

cnyndwllr... .... in the post you reference; my comments were in reference to not being short weighted specifically in either tech, or the oilpatch - two specific sectors being discussed prior. My comments on the subprime financials & homebuilders aren't hard to find. In a nutshell... there are a myriad of posters who never express an original thought, nor ever take a specific time oriented position; but whom allways want to play critic to those who do. Playing critic is fine; but its the petty jealous fence straddlers who continually hedge their comments, who want to then twist reality that I have a problem with. "After the fact" isn't a problem I have... as I usually lead & don't often follow...and not taking a position - isn't something I've often been criticized for. The entire problem here resulted when "bulls" didn't want to here the bearish arguement, didn't want to hear that cyclicals weren't buy & hold growth stocks, didn't want to hear about global recessions, didn't want to hear about their blind cheerleading and especially didn't want to hear about others taking profits & walking away, let alone turning short at the times this thread was at its sentiment peaks of bullishness... "that" is THE reason that thread wars broke out here... But fwiw; I don't think there is any confusion, or "after the fact-ness" on the "GOLD" call, nor was there any to my thoughts on the Nat Gas Mania peak on Dec 30th 2000, the "final OSX exit" call this past June 5th - all made entirely against the grain on these threads... nor was there an "after the fact" call concerning the recent "TURN" trading opp at OSX 58 ? But, what does confuse me; is how an entire group of posters who have basically traded the NAZ long since 3800 (riding 2400 points down & only 500 up) other than occassionally turning short - usually at the bottom of trading ranges and then who rolled over with the OSX which was recently halved...and who continually have ridiculed gold and it's significant market outperformance; can continue to ignore reality and just continually back slap & swap fish stories with each other as if they've been right on track all along ? I guess it take some "high tolerance elasticity" towards reality to do so... or was that "plasticity" (vbg) ? cie le vie`