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.

Pastimes : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lucretius who wrote (169334)	5/31/2002 2:05:43 PM
From: yard_man	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 436258

I see ur point. It's up to you, man -- not me. If he'd have come back again and said something in your face after that post -- I would agree with you. Not sure why people have to assert they were right about this or that call anyway -- we all make good calls and we all make bad ones.

To: Lucretius who wrote (169334)	5/31/2002 2:14:36 PM
From: Ahda	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 436258

It is very difficult to establish what is considered arrogant and what is saying i gave you truth. I read Grace and i believe DAk they both were saying the same thing if writing it differently. I was sitting here smiling seeing similarity in meaning being interpreted in entirely different directions. Outside of a board there is where a moderator could of worked wonders. On a board it is difficult and I suppose much more simple just to end the confusion.

To: Lucretius who wrote (169334)	6/1/2002 7:45:31 AM
From: Earlie	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 436258

Luc: Thanks for putting your views to print. It is much appreciated. I realize that moderating a thread can be a royal pain in the backside, especially a thread that includes such a "diverse" set of contributors. I am also glad that you mentioned the fact that folks chase you to ban individuals, as I was not aware of this. I don't know Claude at all, except as he is reflected in his posts. Having read through many of them, they don't suggest a confrontational individual, especially when one compares his style and content with that of many of our regular posters. And this is a thread where a goodly amount of confrontation is normally (and delightfully) accepted as the norm. That said, I can understand how it could be interpreted as such. From my perspective, one of the neat things about this thread is that it abides strongly held and well argued points of view, posts that wander across a remarkably broad cross section of topics, raucous humour, and pugnacious attitudes. It is also the "home" thread for some of the best "information hounds" to be found anywhere on the net as well as some of the most intelligent stock market "thinkers" I have ever encountered. I have no doubt that this is the reason it attracts such a large "lurker" audience (including many professional traders and journalists). It has a well deserved reputation for being a place where one should post only if one has his/her wits about him and where one can expect to take a certain amount of "abuse" from the resident "thugs"; sort of a well-recognized "warm kitchen" or an arena where one doesn't skate out on to the ice without all pads in place. The problem with banning in such an environment is that it really does cause the thread to "narrow down". Yes, it can be satisfying to see a really obnoxious type tossed out, but to me it is much better to just watch him get carved up through the provision of opposing, well supported facts and/or tough counter perspectives. Even more satisfying is to see the market itself provide a judgement as to which points of view were the more intelligent or perceptive. That being the case, a bit of "Nah, nah, nin nah, nah" has to be accepted by all of us (having been on the receiving end of more than my share of this, I well know the feelings it arouses). One last point in a too-long post. There is nothing personal in this commentary. My admiration for your contributions to this thread should be obvious from my many past positive comments Also, as noted above, I was unaware of the pressures brought to bear on you to ban, which is very unfortunate. Perhaps those seeking future bans should be reminded of the alternative approach to dealing with warm kitchens. Best, Earlie