Duncan Robertson - Chief Wizard

[jimvt]

Where is the proof that Socratees has done something fraudulent in these posts.

My language was intemperate here. I should have said "there are many people who question Socrates' integrity".

What he may or may not have done elsewhere/another time is not an issue here.

I genuinely don't understand how you can say that.

It was requested that this thread be kept open and free from abuse etc. It was also suggested that should anyone want to lay complaints, it should be done on another thread.Nothing has been burried

I understand the difficulties you have in moderating a long thread such as this and I understand barjon's comment along the same lines. However, dissenting voices HAVE been buried even if not by design.

What priveledges has Labos been granted over and above someone else?

He has been given a thread all of his own in which dissent is not tolerated. As far as I know no-one else has this.

I personally believe that the references I gave regarding Cults to be highly pertinent. If others read those links and disagree with me then of course that's fine. However if dissenting posts are hidden (whether intentionally or not) no-one will be able to see and judge for themselves.

 

[Market Wizard]

Some of the commets on this thread remind me of how i felt when, 18 months into my paper trading, derogatory rumours were circulating about Alberts teachings. At the time I was shocked and felt let down and lost, because I looked upto him and momentarily was confused as to what to do.
I then thought about the situation and realised that for me on a personal level, his teachings worked, the way of thinking that he taught us worked in the markets. So i made a conscious decision to carry on along my original path, and have done so evere since, with no regrets.

To those of you who have gained valuable insight from the Socrates thread, maybe that is just what it is. Not everyone will agree with it today, but at some stage during their trading career they will most definitely see some sense in what he says, regardless of whether there is any similarity in their way of viewing the markets. Just like when reading a book on trading psychlogy, you gain more and more the more often you read it.

Not everybody who went on Alberts course feels the same. I know of people who attende his course and wwithin three months of the course had wiped out their accounts, some in full time occupations, these people in the last five years have not said one bad word about Albert.
Who do they blame for their lack of success ???

I know of students who are still trading today, some have found their method and system some are still looking, but all still following Alberts teachings.
I wonder who they will hold responsible for their success/failure????

These people were all taught the same thing in the same way, its just what you got out of it compared to what you expected out of it and more importantly what you made out of it.

As for the comments made by Mike Elvin , just interested to knnow how many people here actually Know or have ever met Mike Elvin, or actually know what he does and how good he is at it, that they can give his words any credance over no words from Albert. After all his is only one opinion, that is his his own.

As this is another opinion, my own.

It was my decision to go on Alberts course while many others were also on offer, i have no regrets only thanks.

My regards to you Albert.

 

[ChartMan]

jimvt and others.

I don't deal in heresay and I don't listen to anyone who has a "mate" who knows something. If, on the otherhand, you wish to lay down concrete facts that you can substantiate , then I'll listen.
There are a lot of things that I would like to post about or comment on, but as a moderator, I have to decide if my posting will be seen as supporting a particular issue or a particular person. I have my own views on the whole Socratees thing and they remain private. You, on the other hand, have the priveledge of being able to post and be damned.

 

[jimvt]

Market Wizard

Thanks for posting your experiences with Albert. It counterbalances the published comments of Mike Elvin, and I'm not so pigheaded as to ignore it. Thank you.

Chartman

I'm scratching my head a bit at your last post. It just sounds like a rant.

Perhaps we had better leave it there.

 

[ChartMan]

It is NOT a rant.

 

[TheBramble]

The mods get my support in moving these posts from the original JftB thread.

Given the very specific guidelines in post #1 on that thread there are a few who could quite easily have been banned. The mods have been very effective and more than even-handed in dealing with this issue.

I have no objection (nor control!) over this thread's continued use as a dumping ground for pointless, under-researched(!) and vaguely worded accusations of nothing much in particular.

However, I no longer claim any association nor interest in it.

 

[trendie]

Hey guys, how are you all doing on this wonderful Saturday afternoon ?

I had this really peculiar dream last night ....

 

[Trader333]

Jim,

I personally believe that the references I gave regarding Cults to be highly pertinent

I cannot see how this is relevant. You are making comparisons between a public bulletin board where the contributors are mostly anonymous and have never met each other and maybe spend a few hours a week contributing to that of dangerously seducing individuals into changing their lives (and often their names), cutting themselves off from families and giving all their money to a cult messiah.

There is simply no way that these two issues can be likened in any way in my view and I still dont see what all the fuss is about ?


Paul

 

[DaveJB]

Odd.
I read Soc's thread and found it quite thought provoking, it was unusual in that I'm not a great fan of the 'psychology is 90% of winning' crowd.... I think it's because I don't find executing stops etc that hard to do, so I'm a bit surprised that so many others do. I'd have liked a bit of a masterclass on trading without indicators etc, I'd then have decided if what I learned was okay by seeing how my analysis did or di not improve.
I don't see how Soc comes out of this badly, frankly. A former student turns out to be a bit of a con man (apparently), and somebody paid £5k for a badly catered workshop that sounds a bit disorganised... more fool him then. So far Soc has led a discussion on psychology, and certainly all I invested in it was time, in return I decided to work a bit harder at improving my analysis and Soc's efforts have had a small (so far) beneficial effect.
There was nothing preventing any sane, sensible adult from enjoying similar results from the thread, some more than others no doubt. There was nothing remotely scam like in it either - and until somebody surfaces to reveal that Soc was PMing people with invites to spend £X with him I'm happy enough.
There remain complaints about sidelining critics - whilst I didn't entirely like that initially, it became obvious that the thread would turn into a slanging match pdq... rather like having a heckler at a meeting. I'd agree that opposing posts should perhaps have greater prominence, so that those wanting the 'other' view could easily check into such a thread - perhaps there's a lesson here for mods etc who I believe acted with our best interests at heart for the most part.
I have yet to see anything proving Soc can't trade.
Dave

 

[darktone]

Jim,



I cannot see how this is relevant. You are making comparisons between a public bulletin board where the contributors are mostly anonymous and have never met each other and maybe spend a few hours a week contributing to that of dangerously seducing individuals into changing their lives (and often their names), cutting themselves off from families and giving all their money to a cult messiah.

There is simply no way that these two issues can be likened in any way in my view and I still dont see what all the fuss is about ?


Paul

paul

A mini and a Porsche are both cars, but cannot be compared directly. Its plain to me there were folk on thread that hung on his every word let alone the lurkers, even when it was clearly shown that certain situations were less than impressive he was beyond redress in their eyes. Im sure you as competent trader know how powerful the lure of trading success is to those who are looking. This is where to my mind the moderation failed.

all mho

regards
dt

 

[BBB]

Well, Old Albie really makes me laarf. Lets look through a rather Alice in Wonderland like keyhole, and as Lloyd Grossman would say 'Lets look at the facts......

Old Albie does his due diligence - just like any other MARKETEER and notices that those peddling courses, seminars, black box systems etc usually receive a less than gracious welcome at T2W. He must find another way to crack this tough nut of a potential goldmine of clients

Old Albie then proceeds to post his ideas and personal view of his world and encourages others to view the world from his own peculiar shade of glasses. If you take a look, you are a genius - if you refuse, you are called a dunce, moron, etc in the most arrogant way that gets others flamed.

He undoubtedly goes into a great deal of effort in crafting his posts - err sorry advertising material/samples. Intermittently, he points out that he is observing us all and our reactions as if HE holds the key to OUR OWN SUCCESS! The damn cheek! He proceeds to create an aura of illusion by posting cryptic messages and out right lies.

He then gets a bit too carried away in his own belief of his own mystic abilities and attempts to predict a market - in real time - as only he can't - as Darktone has proved. Ooops! Never mind, several have been brainwashed already - mostly by PM I would imagine.

The poor old dumbos are routinely threatened with the wrath of old Albie himself - what a shocker! Oh sh!t - you mean he wont accept my £5000 to go on his weasel course? What a bummer! Whats that - youre going to ignore us! Oh, but we so dont believe you - what aren't we going to do with you?

To conclude his campaign, he then rounds up his thread/advertising campaign by engineering his mysterious non-identity revelation so we all know where to go. This is capped off with the timely emergence of his past student crawling out of the woodwork. Great. I bet some of you have already signed up haven't you! Shame on you - after all this preaching and howling about hard work - do you really think you're going to get the keys you are struggling for for a mere 5k?

Well done Albie, Sucker-tease or who ever you are - a campaign even Messrs Saatchi would be proud of!

Come on mate - how many did you catch?

Anyone popping down to G-pod52 for a cuppa then? Sorry mate - Im washing my keyboard.

 

[jimvt]

Trader333
The type of cult behaviour that you describe is cult behaviour at it’s most sinister.
I’m not suggesting for a minute that ‘Darksiding’ (or whatever it’s called) is in the same league. Obviously there are gradations.


Regardless of severity there are common characteristics shown in all cults. I’ve taken the following definitions from a phsychologist called Michael Langone. If you google for his name you will see his credentials. He seems to be widely quoted in this field.

He suggests the following three characteristics as essential in the definition of a cultic group:
1. centralized control by a charismatic leader
2. an us-versus-them mentality that isolates
3. a lack of tolerance for dissent
All three characteristics are strikingly evident on the thread “Journey from the Basement”.

You are a very clever and devious man, Albert.
How many flies have you ensnared in your web?

That is all

 

[robq]

Some time ago I wondered if AL and CW were one and the same. I looked for information about AL using Google (post 5 this thread) but found very little. Certainly no links to expensive courses - which seems odd if he is running a course now. Anyone got any links?

RobQ

 

[Trader333]

Jim,

1. centralized control by a charismatic leader
2. an us-versus-them mentality that isolates
3. a lack of tolerance for dissent

This could apply to almost any scenario where there are organisations that differ in their views on things but it doesnt make them a cult. By this definition every company could be classed as a cult as could every political party, every Football team etc but by this definition then all advertising should be banned on the grounds that we are subtley being persuaded to change our views on things.

In the past I was involved in research into cults and they do not operate this way as they are far more secretive than a bulletin board allows. They also cut you off from being able to contact others and it is highly unusual for the cult leader to be at the forefront of bringing in the masses in fact almost the opposite. What they do is to shroud the leader in mystery where you are not allowed any contact with him/her until you have been sufficiently brainwashed. You will then get a very short audience with them where you and others are whipped up into an emotional frenzy that is done in a way to make you believe that it is their presence that is making you feel this way. This then just adds even more mystery to the whole experience to keep you in.

If a bulletin board was capable of doing this every cult on the planet would switch to doing this and yet they dont. I guess we will just have to differ in our views on this as there is little point in discussing the issue any further.


Paul

 

[trendie]

What are we to make of this ?
Socrates thread comprised much writing.
In the light of recent events, does this mean ALL of it is invalid ?
( actually, some was quite good, irrespective of what has happened.
Thankfully, none of it was tradeable !! Perhaps this was a CLUE. )

What does this tell us about ourselves ? That we can be easily led?
What are we to do?
Go on a lynching party ? If so, to what end ? To make ourselves feel better.
Take it on the chin and move on? Cut our losses.

If this were a trade, are the people who are most upset the ones who invested a lot of their emotional capital in it, and have difficulty writing off this loss ?
( Hands up who invested more than 2% of their emotional capital in this thread )

Like the TheBramble, I think we should just move on.

I don’t think anything can be done. In the future, we will be more aware of similar situations.
I hope we don’t overreact and become cynical of everything, thereby missing out on good ideas.

Moderators;
The moderators have taken a side-swipe in this.
The mods here are not policemen, nor are they specially trained, as far as I know, to be mods.
These people are traders who give their time, for nothing, for no other reason that they believe in this site, and genuinely want to help others.
They are people, and can be easily be swept along by events, like anyone else.
They made decisions that, at the time, appeared to be the correct one.

Hindsight, in any context, is cheap.

One thing I would NOT like to see, is capable and respected people, deciding the hassle is too much, and deciding to quit as moderators, because of the crap they get.
NB: Chartman is a real trader, who proves his trading credentials EVERY day through his DowTrader thread.

There must be many people feeling bewildered over these recent events. Jimvt has expressed his views. No doubt, they may shared in private by many others.

Learn more than one method. ( there is no grail, holy or otherwise )
Always cross-check info with other sites or books.
Only trade what you can afford to lose.
Only learn what you can afford to walk away from. ( does this make sense ? )
Only use what you understand.

This, for some, will be a big draw-down.
The real test, for you guys, is before you.
Do you have the mettle to carry on, or will you fold ?

PS: Please no more revelations !! I have a bottle of Mumm champers on ice, and I don’t think my liver can take it !!

 

[Dynamite]

I can't understand what is going on here. I have just registered on the site and came to this thread because it was at the top of the list.Why is it that everyone seems so cross and bewildered. Who is this trader Chief Wizard. He sounds very important to me. What has he done that is so wrong. Can anyone explain.

 

[DaveJB]

A gentleman ran the most successful (in terms of numbers reading it) thread on T2W, which was delivered in a somewhat idiosyncratic manner, and rather unusually for T2W you couldn't post comments aimed at disproving the ideas or (essentially) argue with the chap running the thread - Socrates.
After a couple of months his identity was revealed, he has run trading courses in the past, and one chap who wrote a book says he paid £5k to go on the course and he didn't think it was any good.
A pupil (Duncan Robertson) on that course has set himself up in Skye, and appears to be somewhat of a con artist - curiously using as an example of his own brilliance a story whereby he called market turns in real time 13 times (or something like that) in succession... a feat most traders would regard as quite impressive I'd suggest.
The story appears, in fact, to be about this 'Chief Wizard' - ie the CW did call the market correctly, and a lazy journalist didn't bother checking when crediting Duncan Robertson with the feat.
T2W now has several groups arguing gently about what it all means <g>

If Albert did indeed call the market as described, I fail to see how Duncan R 'nicking' the story for his own benefit reflects badly on Soc, actually I was rather impressed by it!
If this was an elaborate marketting scam I'd be quite surprised, I can think of plenty of ways of doing it that wouldn't be as bizarre frankly.... if Soc wanted to whip up customers I'd have expected an approach that put people's backs up to a lesser extent. I would accept that a torrent of T2W users all paying £5k to go visit him would make me a tad more suspicious. However, until it turns out that it has generated paying customers I see no reason to assume the case proved - on top of which I would also say that anybody paying £5k for a course after such a 'taster' deserves to be £5k worse off.... caveat emptor!

 

[Dynamite]

Thank you for your answer. It looks as though you know what you are talking about and are quite a good good judge of character. It seems like a lot of fuss over nothing. There must be something really good about the thread if it attracted so many people. I'll read it and try to learn something from it. Why do you think it attracted so much attention. I'm surprised that some people are perpared to go to a lot of trouble to criticise someone they haven't even met and whose methods they don't even know. Perhaps they are jealous for some reason. I've had a quick look and it looks as though Mr Socrates is a very thorough person and seems to know what he is talking about. Why would someone spend all that time trying to catch a few stupid people out - its not worth it. People are rather sad don't you think. I think I'd rather try to find things out for myself than be mislead by a few silly people trying to get revenge for some reason. Maybe their not v clever themselves

 

[growltiger]

Why the fuss?

There are several reasons for people to be making a fuss. They all have to do with the way that the Socrates persona functioned on t2w:

In style, the postings of Socrates were often pompous and elaborate. The style amused many, but repelled others. Also, the "Socrates" persona was much given to dishing out criticism of other posters, often couched in terms that must have been personally wounding (the victim was typically stigmatised as being short of a brain-cell or two, slow on the uptake, and unwilling to undertake the hard work necessary for success). The whole Socrates persona was by its very design provocative .

The threads purported to convey - in a metaphorical and elliptical manner - some very fundamental truths about trading and its psychology. They went deep into disturbing questions about the nature of human personality and how it could interfere with the ability to trade. The stance taken by Socrates was that the trader needed to jettison his humanity, and trade in another persona, which lacked the interfering emotional and experiential baggage of the trader's actual personality.

You don't need to take a view about the content of the thread to see that if serious doubt were cast upon the integrity or the personal psychological stability of the author, the whole value of such a profound quest would be put in some doubt. It would be rather as if Moses had run off with the Ark and left the Israelites to founder in the wilderness.

Although no connection was ever explicitly made on t2w until Socrates himself "let the cat out of the bag" last week, the alleged activities of the Chief Wizard were chronicled here in an extract from the book by Dr Elvin.

As described, these activities include questionable teaching methods, questionable business ethics (selling out of date software, failing to teach any cogent trading methodology etc) and a fair degree of personal eccentricity (having a booby-trapped home, claiming to teleport his mind to remote locations at will).

Now a connection has been alleged, yet the Elvin description has not been demonstrated to be substantially untrue of the Chief Wizard. Little wonder, therefore, that some of the people who most value the Socrates threads are feeling personally undermined.

At all times, Socrates was zealously defended by the moderators (two Socratic threads were "privileged" in the sense that no criticism was permitted to be posted thereon). A number of people got irritated by this policing of the board, and some expressed this irritation with sufficient strength to get themselves banned. Some of the unhappiness is due to the notion that this policing was being undertaken in defence of someone whose activities have now been called into question. (Possibly some of the moderators may themselves be feeling bruised, in retrospect).

No doubt, the Elvin material is capable of being rebutted. Or it might turn out that the identification of Socrates and the Chief Wizard described by Elvin is, after all, just another piece of whimsy. But meanwhile, there are plenty of reasons why participants in the t2w community might be feeling a little raw. That is all.

 

[Dom1]

Dynamite

Why would you bother to register on T2W without first looking over some of the threads. This must be a first. Has anyone else registered on T2W without first having spent time looking over the material? You said you had a quick look at the thread in question after your initial post, about 2 hours. You say Socrates seems thorough and you have even decided to defend him based on this quick look. Thats a big thread. Is your decision to defend Socrates and to say that he seems thorough based on your thoroughnesss. And I know why CW seems important to you- its called narcism.