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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Bob Brinker: Market Savant & Radio Host -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: joefromspringfield who wrote (37478)	7/31/2008 1:39:01 PM
From: queenleah	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42834

Joe, Brinker's website has little to do with the defamation that goes on at other websites, and Brinker and Hulbert among others have thoroughly answered the questions on whether the QQQ trade should properly have been included in any portfolio results. I know people don't like "censorship", and some define censorship according to a finer line than others, depending on their preconceived opinions. We all have the right to do what we can properly do to prevent or minimize harassment and dismiss defamation of our names and work and reputations, public figures and legitimate businesspersons, particularly so. I repeat: " What's so wrong with Brinker (if true) protecting his name and his reputation by all legal means from defamation by those whose goal is simply to defame him out of their never-ending anger and disappointment?"

To: joefromspringfield who wrote (37478)	7/31/2008 2:01:16 PM
From: InvesTing	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 42834

queenleah said: " What's so wrong with Brinker (if true) protecting his name and his reputation by all legal means from defamation by those whose goal is simply to defame him out of their never-ending anger and disappointment?" Joe Replied: "His reputation as it is being touted on his website is based on a fraud. His performance numbers do not include ALL his trades. My goal is not to defame him but to get the truth out about his record." Does this person believe pointing out the truth about Brinker's calls is "defamation"? Does this person believe that reporting exactly what he said on the radio at an earlier time and comparing it with a flip flop a short time later is "defamation"? Or is that something that a fan or insider just wants to keep quiet? Likening it to the political campaign, if one of the candidates voted against apple pie and the press or opposing campaign publicly wrote that the action occured; is that defamation? Of course the backers or hangers on to the candidate spurning apple pie would claim it was "defamation", to tell the truth about their candidate. The objective person of course would realize that the candidate himself, insiders and rabid hanger's on simply wanted to claim that anything that refects negatively on their candidate is "defamation" and would likely attack the messenger as evil and try to make people believe that they should not listen to any of the negative TRUTH about their candidate. Indeed peanut_butter_luvr/Peanut Butter Queen this and that has always tried to gloss over the slippery nature of this particular marketimer. Whether leaving out advice for up to 1/3 of an entire portfolio, or wanting to dismiss the competence/arrogance issue that the contrast between his May 31 diatribe against "false prophets" and "cassandras" and his recent pretense that he just discovered the price of oil was high (and rode down a bear market). If Queen/peanut_butter_luvr had it's way there would be nothing to counter the rather incomplete picture painted by the radio show talker. This person would love it if there was no mention of Bob Brinker except a Bob Brinker website to buy your trucker hats and believe the less than fully disclosed materials to get hooked on marketiming. It's quite fine if anyone wants to buy a marketiming newsletter or a dozen of them. Its fine if people want to argue the merits of marketiming or Bob Brinker's calls and past performance or his personal traits. But the person posting as Queen and PeanutButter/peanut_butter_luvr among other names while contending to have never done so; doesn't want to discuss Bob Brinker. This person wants to stop such discussion (dishonestly denying using different identities on the same board pretending to be other people with the same opinion) and have people think that the less than "rah "rah" "Go Bob" posts about Brinker are the work of uninformed whiners or people who are competing with Brinker. Tis not the case. Only Bob Brinker is responsible for any controversy over his worth and his character. Because Bob Brinker says "Marketiming " is the best approach to investing, certainly doesn't mean that is true. Indeed on all of Bob Brinker's reading list I have yet to have Queen Peanut Butter or anyone else give me selections that promote marketiming as Brinker claims it should be done. I believe Brinker hypes this profit center of his as "a graduate course in investing". Don't you find it very strange that there is no literary work in the entire course Brinker offers LOL, that sanctions his marketiming game? :) And finally, Queen PeanutButter/peanut_butter_luvr, would rather not see talk about the fact that Brinker just weeks after his rant against the "false prophets", missing a bear market and never mentioning the fact that there was a bear market. And that is as good a glimpse into why you have to watch Brinker carefully and know that he doesn't tell the "whole story" as you will get. It also would be a good explanation of Queen Peanut_butter_luvrs reason to be less than truthful to Dave here at SI and lie to those even on it's side of the Brinker debate to back up it's cocknbull stories to establish credibility. This person simply wants the discussion to be about the critics of marketiming and this marketimer in particular and hopes that people don't see the shortcomings of the method and the man. Once outted as fibbing about not posting as peanut_butter_luvr/PeanutButter here the reason for this person's attacks are obvious.