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: SliderOnTheBlack who wrote (94547)	11/26/2001 4:08:21 AM
From: cnyndwllr	Respond to of 95453

Slider, re, first: <<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...>> The opposite is true for me and for many others. The strength of one position is best seen when contrasted to the opposing position. In the process it's not who believes what, but rather the quality of the analysis. This process requires debate, discourse and differing opinions. The thread wars broke out in a negative and destructive fashion when the attacks became personal and those who held contrary positions were personally attacked. From there it wasn't far to the reconstruction of history in various posts and a lot of time and energy wasted on issues that shouldn't have even been issues. I don't claim to be blameless but it didn't help that isopatch got so insufferable that it almost took a couple of stiff drinks to read the thread without throwing up. Second, re: <<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 think that many of us have been struggling this year. The markets have been hard on longs and those of us who have ridden a few updrafts and caught a few shorts are not claiming this as a good year. I don't know about others but I am slightly down for the year. I was up 20% or so a couple of times but couldn't hold it. If not for 9/11 I expect that I would be better off now. I was in early then for what I saw as signs of an improving economy. I am still recovering from that. I know from the posts of others and their more correct forecasts or more conservative approaches, that some are up for the year. I don't know of anyone who claims to have been right all along and I surely don't know of anyone who rode the market all the way down from naz 3800. The only posts that claim that people who post on HDP were long from ???? naz are from you and isopatch. If we were that single minded, do you think we would have been able to trade successfully in the market? This is a competitive game and the ones who follow single minded patterns tend to fall on the field of battle with stunning regularity. That's just common sense. Most of the posters on HDP probably have better trading minds than I do along with more trading experience. I have seen their stated views of various stocks and the direction of the markets. They have often been wrong, but more often they are right. These are not blind believers who head for the cliffs en masse. With regard to your gold calls, even if you made nothing on them you outperfomed the major indexes and the broad market by a wide margin. You may have made good money there. That's not the point. I think that the thing about gold is that it has no appeal to many of us and doesn't hold our interest. From my point view, the drivers for gold are too speculative for me to grab onto and I am not betting on the "complete collapse" of our economic system as called for by isopatch or his dog, whichever makes those stupid pronouncements. Responding to your strident calls on gold did make for some good humor though, didn't it? You had to laugh at some of the comments concerning gold uses and hoarding. As far as those who only criticize, so what? Valid criticism has it's place. The real problem was, as I've said before, the abandonment of rules of behavior that are based on giving people room to be wrong and even stupid in their disagreements without dancing on their heads. That progressed to dancing on the heads of those that were often neither wrong nor stupid, even if it meant attributing thoughts and statements to them that were not theirs. We have had some pretty strong disagreements on the HDP thread over stocks and politics. We have never personalized those disagreements to the point that the conflict is about people rather than ideas. I think you have to ask yourself what is different about that thread versus the thread we used to have here? On the sd11 thread, by contrast, the axe drops quickly on those who stray only a little and those who hold "wrong" views are villified. I suspect that you enjoy active debate with those who are not overwhelmed by the force or length of your statements and can therefor test your reasoning. I know that it's good for the value of a portfolio to have such poster's review. The thing is that the process requires respect for others and a strong enough ego to take criticism of points of view without taking that criticism personally. This is especially hard to do when things are going downhill but in the longer run it's what makes some people the best traders. I know that I have made money off your views, whether because I agreed with them or disagreed with them. g. Ed