Another Thread Closed!

[tune]

Socrates,

many moons ago, in a now deleted thread, you roughly insulted me for no apparent reason.
I would like to thank you for that. It saved me a lot of time and brain power. If it's purple, ignore it.

Respect is earned old mate. Respect is earned.


tune

 

[new_trader]

All the questions that were asked on that thread were perfectly reasonable...you chose as usual not to answer any of them....where is the evidence that these trades took place eh....where?

CV,

Just for the record...are you one of those members who goes out of their way to FIND Socrates or AVOID him?

 

[new_trader]

SHORT ANSWER SON:

HE HAS NOT ANSWERED ANY QUESTIONS PERTAINING TO HIS ACTIVITIES.

I see...I see..and this gives everyone the right to continually harass him about it in every thread, regardless of the topic at hand...? If we apply this logic fairly to all members, Socrates can never be accused of derailing a thread because that would be hypocritical. Don't you think?

 

[new_trader]

Because of all the threads he's derailed. You're new. You don't know the history. And since there's been so much editing and so many deletions, reconstruction is impossible, though anyone who'd even care to try has way too much time on his hands.

You happen to think he's great, and that's just fine. What is it to anyone else? And if he'd stop hijacking threads simply for the sake of instigating fights, then peace would reign in Happy Valley. But he can't stop. So there you are.

DB,

I am not that new. If you look through my profile and find the links to my earlier posts you will find that I once had the audacity to join in on the mob attacks against Socrates. It wasn't until I read his posts carefully and with deliberate effort to understand them that I realised there is real value in what he writes. I think he even insulted me on a few occassions and looking back now, I deserved it.

 

[Splitlink]

DB,

I am not that new. If you look through my profile and find the links to my earlier posts you will find that I once had the audacity to join in on the mob attacks against Socrates. It wasn't until I read his posts carefully and with deliberate effort to understand them that I realised there is real value in what he writes. I think he even insulted me on a few occassions and looking back now, I deserved it.

Don't sell yourself short. Nobody deserves to be insulted. What happens is that the way he writes touches a few fuses. It's pure desire to aggravate and is a sign that he is tired of the thread. When the rudeness starts, it is time to leave. I have had him on Ignore since the options thread and find it an immense saving of time.

Split

 

[A Dashing Blade]

DB,
. . . . It wasn't until I read his posts carefully and with deliberate effort to understand them that I realised there is real value in what he writes. . . .

Many views make a market NT, and if you get value then fair enough, but surely, when someone persistantly posts paranoid and delusional rubbish like this . . .

When you do this you will really discover who the real detractors, decievers, derailers and persistent bullies are in reality and then tomorrow we can discuss this further:~ why they do it, what is their hidden agenda, what in fact is the the real mob agenda and why attempts are being made to hide this from you.


when someone persistantly fails to engage in any form of debate, let alone constructive debate, when someone continually fails to answer direct questions, lies to the membership, goes underground when caught out lying, reappears two months later as if nothing has happened, claims to possess the secret of the univerese but is sworn to secrecy and so can't proove it (hmmmmm, I feel a common theme coming on) . . . but hey, you decide.

 

[chump]

Degrees,
"Thread starters, if given restricted or local moderator power to delete – not even edit – posts, would serve well to keep serial spoilers away from their threads. This seems like the most sensible and the least draconian measure that could be adopted. And one which is technically simple to implement."

I suggested the above, but was told it was not technically on. If I misunderstood then Sharky can correct me.

 

[new_trader]

Many views make a market NT, and if you get value then fair enough, but surely, when someone persistantly posts paranoid and delusional rubbish like this . . .

When you do this you will really discover who the real detractors, decievers, derailers and persistent bullies are in reality and then tomorrow we can discuss this further:~ why they do it, what is their hidden agenda, what in fact is the the real mob agenda and why attempts are being made to hide this from you.


when someone persistantly fails to engage in any form of debate, let alone constructive debate, when someone continually fails to answer direct questions, lies to the membership, goes underground when caught out lying, reappears two months later as if nothing has happened, claims to possess the secret of the univerese but is sworn to secrecy and so can't proove it (hmmmmm, I feel a common theme coming on) . . . but hey, you decide.

Dashing Blade,

I have decided but unfortuantely their seems to be a continual campaign to alter and/or influence the decision. Can I ask you something then? Do you think the following trading rules are valid and if followed would most likely lead to a trader being successful?

(The answer can only be a YES or NO)

1) Don't become an involuntary investor by holding onto stocks whose price has fallen.
2) A stock is never too high to buy and never too low to short.
3) Markets are never wrong - opinions often are.
4) The highest profits are made in trades that show a profit right from the start.
5) No trading rules will deliver a profit 100 percent of the time.

 

[Paddy Murphy]

Hello lads. My name is Paddy Murphy from Cork. I have done a few posts over on another Irish thread but I am not getting any joy. Someone over there mentioned the CYOF lad and when I searched for him I see that he is banned and that his threads are closed.I was hoping to speak with him about some tips with this trading lark. A friend of mine made a packet and recently bought a new BMW Turbo Diesel with a telly in the dash. But he wont tell me how he did it. All he will tell me is he used CFD. I thought he had Mad Cow disease or something. Are any of you lads betting men. I love the old flutter and I have one or twelve most days,lol. I dont mind sharing some profits from wins so you dont have to worray about that.Thanks.
Paddy

 

[SOCRATES]

All the questions that were asked on that thread were perfectly reasonable...you chose as usual not to answer any of them....where is the evidence that these trades took place eh....where?

No, they were not reasonable or even relevant.

If you want to persuade yourself they were paper trades, fine by me.

If you want to persuade yourself they were real trades, again, fine by me.

If you are curious about margin, again, fine by me.

All of these things are fine by me, you can persuade yourself to concern yourself with them.

But I am not interested in what you might or might not persuade yourself to concern yourself with.

I am concerned that I set out in Plain Vanilla to show that 85% or more of all options expire worthless and that the writer has the edge over the buyer.

Despite endless attempts at derailing, serial attacks, rudeness, false accusation, detraction, interruption with off topic posts, and serial nuisance of every sort, I proved my point, which is what I set out to do.

Ultimately that I am right (as usual) is what serves to infuriate nearly everyone, including you it seems.

Take off your blinkers and look at the facts.

Everything I wrote expired worthless, at ZERO, with the exception of one and then at a far lower price than that at which it was written and therefore PROVING MY POINT CONCLUSIVELY.

My thread Plain Vanilla I created in response to another thread pursuing silly arguments (as is usual here) called "Writers versus the Buyers...who has the edge?"

My thread proves the writers have the edge conclusively.

You cannot complain I do not tell you everything.

 

[A Dashing Blade]

Hello lads. My name is Paddy Murphy from Cork. I have done a few posts over on another Irish thread but I am not getting any joy. Someone over there mentioned the CYOF lad and when I searched for him I see that he is banned and that his threads are closed.I was hoping to speak with him about some tips with this trading lark. A friend of mine made a packet and recently bought a new BMW Turbo Diesel with a telly in the dash. But he wont tell me how he did it. All he will tell me is he used CFD. I thought he had Mad Cow disease or something. Are any of you lads betting men. I love the old flutter and I have one or twelve most days,lol. I dont mind sharing some profits from wins so you dont have to worray about that.Thanks.
Paddy

hi Bull/CYOF/Atlantic Ghost etc . . . how you doing <waves>

 

[counter_violent]

No, they were not reasonable or even relevant.

If you want to persuade yourself they were paper trades, fine by me.

If you want to persuade yourself they were real trades, again, fine by me.

If you are curious about margin, again, fine by me.

All of these things are fine by me, you can persuade yourself to concern yourself with them.

But I am not interested in what you might or might not persuade yourself to concern yourself with.

I am concerned that I set out in Plain Vanilla to show that 85% or more of all options expire worthless and that the writer has the edge over the buyer.

Despite endless attempts at derailing, serial attacks, rudeness, false accusation, detraction, interruption with off topic posts, and serial nuisance of every sort, I proved my point, which is what I set out to do.

Ultimately that I am right (as usual) is what serves to infuriate nearly everyone, including you it seems.

Take off your blinkers and look at the facts.

Everything I wrote expired worthless, at ZERO, with the exception of one and then at a far lower price than that at which it was written and therefore PROVING MY POINT CONCLUSIVELY.

My thread Plain Vanilla I created in response to another thread pursuing silly arguments (as is usual here) called "Writers versus the Buyers...who has the edge?"

My thread proves the writers have the edge conclusively.

You cannot complain I do not tell you everything.

The jury is not out...the jury delivered it's verdict...unless new evidence comes to light...the appeal will be turned down

 

[A Dashing Blade]

Dashing Blade,

I have decided but unfortuantely their seems to be a continual campaign to alter and/or influence the decision. Can I ask you something then? Do you think the following trading rules are valid and if followed would most likely lead to a trader being successful?

(The answer can only be a YES or NO)

1) Don't become an involuntary investor by holding onto stocks whose price has fallen.
2) A stock is never too high to buy and never too low to short.
3) Markets are never wrong - opinions often are.
4) The highest profits are made in trades that show a profit right from the start.
5) No trading rules will deliver a profit 100 percent of the time.

Do you think the following trading rules are valid and if followed would most likely lead to a trader being successful?
1) Yes - ie good rule ie "Cut your losses"
2) I agree with this statement given that the stock is still traded (I'm old enough to remember the Polly Peck debacle)
3) I agree with this statement but prefer the "Markets can remain irrational longer than you can stay solvent" version.
4) Read as you have written it ie as an axiomatic truth I'd have to go for "The statment is impossible to prove or disprove". Sorry. However, I agree wih Socrates general point that a trade should go well right from the start.
5) I agree with this statement. There is no Holy Grail.

As you've directly asked me what I would consider to be elementary questions, I assume there are more to come . . .?

 

[dbphoenix]

DB,

I am not that new. If you look through my profile and find the links to my earlier posts you will find that I once had the audacity to join in on the mob attacks against Socrates. It wasn't until I read his posts carefully and with deliberate effort to understand them that I realised there is real value in what he writes. I think he even insulted me on a few occassions and looking back now, I deserved it.

There may be "real value" in some of what he writes, but it's nothing more than a rehash of the work of others. Those who don't read very widely are persuaded that it's all fresh and insightful. Those who do read widely recognize not only that it's all quite conventional but that he understands very little of it.

As for being insulted by an egomaniac, if you believe that you deserve that sort of thing, then you and Albert are a perfect fit. I'm sure the two of you will develop the same sort of relationship that he has with CYOF.

Db

 

[A Dashing Blade]

My thread proves the writers have the edge conclusively.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again . . .

Socrates<============================================================>Reality

 

[new_trader]

Do you think the following trading rules are valid and if followed would most likely lead to a trader being successful?
1) Yes - ie good rule ie "Cut your losses"
2) I agree with this statement given that the stock is still traded (I'm old enough to remember the Polly Peck debacle)
3) I agree with this statement but prefer the "Markets can remain irrational longer than you can stay solvent" version.
4) Read as you have written it ie as an axiomatic truth I'd have to go for "The statment is impossible to prove or disprove". Sorry. However, I agree wih Socrates general point that a trade should go well right from the start.
5) I agree with this statement. There is no Holy Grail.

As you've directly asked me what I would consider to be elementary questions, I assume there are more to come . . .?

Only to say that those rules, which you mostly agree with, were written by a man who went bankrupt more than once in his life and eventually committed suicide because he considered himself a failure.

 

[A Dashing Blade]

Only to say that those rules, which you mostly agree with, were written by a man who went bankrupt more than once in his life and eventually committed suicide because he considered himself a failure.

You appear to be implying that he "invented" those rules.

Personally I'd have said that they are basic fundamentals known to Dutch tulip merchants, Japanese rice traders and Roman olive oil traders many many centuries ago.

Sorry n_t, I don't get your point ?

 

[new_trader]

There may be "real value" in some of what he writes, but it's nothing more than a rehash of the work of others. Those who don't read very widely are persuaded that it's all fresh and insightful. Those who do read widely recognize not only that it's all quite conventional but that he understands very little of it.

As for being insulted by an egomaniac, if you believe that you deserve that sort of thing, then you and Albert are a perfect fit. I'm sure the two of you will develop the same sort of relationship that he has with CYOF.

Db

It is ONLY through reading widely, study and practice that I discovered what Socrates says AND the way he says it is worthwhile reading. I am not disagreeing with you, not all of it is original, but he explains it in a very unique and original way that helps bridge the gaps in understanding. Some people are content with only knowing how to tell the time, some are interesting in knowing how a clock works as well, and then, there are others who want to understand what time actually represents. Take John Harrison for example. A "simple" clockmaker who realised the problem of longitude could be solved with an accurate clock....

"Harrison battled throughout his life against influential astronomers who scoffed at a mechanical solution to the problem, favouring celestial observations. Despite opposition
and gross unfairness, he doggedly pursued his goal of claiming
the prestigious and hugely valuable 'longitude prize.'
This was only awarded to him as an old man and only after the intervention of the king who rectified the injustice Harrison had suffered at the hands of the Board of Longitude."

 

[new_trader]

You appear to be implying that he "invented" those rules.

Personally I'd have said that they are basic fundamentals known to Dutch tulip merchants, Japanese rice traders and Roman olive oil traders many many centuries ago.

Sorry n_t, I don't get your point ?

My point was a little obscure. I was merely trying to point out that Jesse Livermore is regarded as one of the greatest traders of all time.

 

[counter_violent]

Only to say that those rules, which you mostly agree with, were written by a man who went bankrupt more than once in his life and eventually committed suicide because he considered himself a failure.

There are many types of character that go to make up society. Livermore was One of lifes tryers, learning all the time from his own mistakes, also he identified when the playing field was not level and found ways to make the game at least equal. History is full of people who at first don't succeed, but they have the strength of character to overcome temporary difficulties...There is no shame in being a bankrupt, picking ones self up and starting over...indeed I would go further, I would say in certain fields bankruptcy opens up a world of information hidden to the average Joe and this information is crucial to deeper understanding and workings. As to his state of mind at the end, it's quite possible that he could'nt live up to his own exacting standards for whatever reason.