I do not wish to add to the invective on this thread, as it's one of the best places on SI, imo. But I do have to comment on the recent thread of posts.
Isopatch, in commenting on LG's post, said. . . <<However, in SO's case we consistently see a heavy number of bearish posts late in a down trend, followed by more negative posts that are clearly fighting the subsequent market rally. Then, he disappears from the thread for months.>>
Something that both Iso and LG -- two posters I highly respect, by the way -- fail to mention is that Stock Operator was posting long before the April rally, during a time when some others were convinced that the downswing that started at the end of January 2001 was over. It wasn't. Was he wrong at the April bottom? Surely! But to say he simply popped in late in the downtrend and was bearish is a gross oversimplification. Also, he did NOT post after Sept 21st, so he may or may not have missed that rally. We don't know. Still, for you, Isopatch, to say there's a "consistent pattern" is truly absurd, unless you call one incident a pattern. Statistically, as Don has told us all, that's not enough incidents. <g>
Isopatch further adds <<OTOH think it's reasonable to point out rare cases of those like Stock Operator who post a heavy of bearish msgs near market lows late in each market decline. LG's post should not be be dismissed, but given serious thought by all who read this thread and are interested in being successfull traders.>>
I agree that LG's post should not be dismissed. But I do find unintentional humor in your post. You see, I only know you from this board, not from SD II, your home. Not long ago, a poster by the name of Dabum, I think, came on this board and commented about your calls in a way similar to LG's comments about Stock Operator's. Dabum included links to your missed calls, much as you do to Stock Operator. Now, Dabum might be a crazed stalker, for all I know, following you from thread to thread. And yet, from my point of view, on this thread he did nothing more than you and LG just did. In fact, I believe he said something similar to your assertation that <<IMHO, it's not only fair to post this information in a moderately worded msg, but also important to do so for the less experienced participants here.>> While I agree that you both believed you were providing an important service, you can see why I find your post ironic.
Further, you write: <<Returning to the present, my work does indicate the current downtrend isn't over yet. So, as has been the case before, SO could get enough downside sometime in the next few weeks to gain the temporary credibility necesssary to pull some of the less well informed into a heavily short or high cash status when the market has bottomed or clearly entered a new rally phase.>>
I wonder why you believe that S.O. is trying to "pull some of the less informed" into something? Do you believe he works for someone? Also, when you make a call, are you trying to pull people into your ideas. . . or are you, as I suspect, merely sharing your hard work generously? Regardless of LG's assertation that "da boys" (who he reads as well as anyone) had planned to rally us off the Sept 10th bottom, we all know that, tragically, that didn't happen. Stock Operator sure did disappear after his Sept 7th post -- though if he was short and cashed out, he did well, didn't he? Rather than everyone pointing out that S.O. disappeared after Sept 11th and did not tell his "followers" anything (hey, he might have covered and gone long at the bottom, too, ya know), I'm surprised no one here wonders if perhaps he was personally affected by Sept 11th in ways we don't know. I seem to recall his earlier screenname was NYCBoy or somesuch. I hope he and his family were okay during the tragic events of September.
Another irony here, of course, is that you and Stock Operator both haven't seen a bottom yet. So you actually agree with his current position. . . yet warn others not to pay attention to him? What if S.O. turns bullish at around the same time as you? It could happen, you know.
I don't mean this as an attack, because I value your contributions to this thread (and you seem to have picked up attackers without me! <g>). There are so many interesting and intriguing posters who share their hard work that I never know why so many of them have to fight with each other, just because their hard work shows different things. I do know, however, that the tit-for-tat, he-said/she-said battles that go on on the boards serve no good purpose. We all make mistakes, as you freely admit. And due to the wonders of the internet, our full records are here for examination.
One thing I've admired about Chris' thread is that he works hard at getting everyone to work hard to help each other. To do that, all of us, at one time or another have had to let slights/indignities slide. I hope you, S.O. and LG all continue to post, and continue to use charts and knowledge to help others of us learn. . . whether we're learning from you or about you. . . so that we can all continue building our knowledge and, ideally, helping each other profit from it.
Respectfully,
the freep |
