The Five Commandments of Aussie Stock Forums

[barney]

the older that I get the dumber I know I am.

prediction of something its not possible to say with any certainty that you are correct.

the best decisions I often take are BEING wrong. admitting your WRONG and moving on.

Being right, or stubborn, or pigheaded, gets one no where.

I listen and have been gifted by doing so, even to the most illogical of arguments.


women are a gift as is love. I suspect if we had more females running the world we would be far better off.

Thanks for the response …. I have posted a few excerpts from your post above for those who like to skim read

Pretty much agree with 90% of your assessments

In a nutshell …. "Listen, learn, and take responsibility for our actions." Cheers.

 

[kahuna1]

Yep,

Take ownership of your actions. Listen to others no matter how they may initially appear. Try and examine their position and how they arrived there. Beyond agreeing to disagree, becoming strident or trying to convince someone on the spot is a big waste of time. Even getting or changing others opinions is actually irrelevant, we are what we are. Sharing how and why you hold one view is to be shared as is the receipt of someone else's view. All the the last one up to a point where its .... a game on their part.

Have fun.

 

[Smurf1976]

Agreed. In recent times I have seriously considered shutting down the General Chat forum entirely. While I haven't gone down that road yet, I am still considering placing restrictions on it.

In any case, I would urge people to avoid the General Chat forum and post in threads in other forums. ASF is a stock market forum, so let's have more stock chat, trading chat, and investment chat. That's what this community should be all about. Not bickering endlessly about politics and religion.

Just my thoughts:

The first and foremost reason I visit this forum is for the "heads up" sort of posts relating to individual stocks. More analysis is always better but it doesn't overly bother me if it's lacking since it's still a "heads up" that something's going on and I should be taking a look at it myself.

Second is posts not relating to specific stocks but which have investment potential or implications for multiple companies are still of interest despite some of those being in the "General Chat" section. As examples I'll cite:

*Discussion about the taxation policies of the government or credible opposition parties (relevant to all investors).

*Issues with Boeing 737 aircraft (could turn out to be relevant to all airlines and is of relevance to anyone who invests in the US market and owns Boeing shares).

*The potential mass adoption of electric vehicles (affects pretty much every company involved with the automotive industry, the supply of conventional vehicle fuels, the entire electricity supply chain and has relevance to the producers of commodities used heavily in those vehicles - all up that's quite a number of ASX listed stocks including a few blue chips).

*Retail sales, shops closing etc (relevant to the companies involved, their direct competitors and if there's enough of them then it becomes relevant to shopping center owners, some of which are listed, and so on).

*House prices and general economics (directly and indirectly affects many stocks and of course owning property is itself an investment option, albeit not one that's the specific focus of this forum).

Cars, aviation, taxation, retail, houses - all "big" stuff really and it has an impact. It seems reasonable to me that they'd be topics here unless the aim is to turn ASF into a strict stock picking forum and that's it.

Third I'd put the "harmless" sort off topic stuff. Travel photos, someone has a new dog or went to a concert, whatever. Harmless in my view so long as it's a minor sideline to the main purpose of the forum. I've never seen any online forum that doesn't have a place where posts like that would be acceptable.

Fourth and the big one is politics and religion for the sake of politics and religion and which is discussing topics of no relevance to any ASX listed company or to investing in general.

That's where the problem is in my view and there are multiple reasons for that.

First, the very nature of discussion is based on "beliefs" and I think it's fair to say that concept is somewhat at odds with the purpose of the forum.

Second is the sheer volume of such discussion. If I'm looking for all the new posts on specific stocks then it's one thing to have some stuff about unsafe aircraft and taxation policies mixed in, there's a limited number of such subjects so as long as they're contained to a single thread on that topic they can't really crowd out the stock posts, but it's another thing entirely when literally the whole page comes up full of nothing other than multiple threads about politics and religion none of which are relevant to even one listed company.

Third is that such posts tend to be a magnet for rudeness and so on and that is a huge turn off.

Looking through the 12 most recent threads in General Chat, some observations:

1. Is Global Warming becoming unstoppable?

2. A perspective of Racism amd White Privilege in the US

3. Religion, Science, Scepticism, Philosophy and things metaphysical

4. Electric cars?

5. Big Pharma and Ethics = Oxymoron?

6. Sell WA to China

7. Chinese influence in Australia

8. Useless Labor Party

9: 50% of managers could be psychopaths: research

10. Peter Dutton - The Great Pretender?

11. Boeing 737 Max: Death Aircraft

12. Thread: No more than 5 words per post and doesn't annoy others

Now I haven't read every post in all those but looking at the title and a brief look at content:

*4, 5, 6, 9 and 11 have at least some relevance to ASX listed stocks, investing or business. I don't see them as out of place on a stick market forum.

*12 is totally off topic but harmless (note I haven't read the whole thread).

*1, 3, 8, 10 = religion and politics. I've included climate change in that category since whilst I do see it as a problem, any investment potential mostly relates to things covered in other threads (eg electric cars or renewable energy) and the issue is mainstream political more than practically any other issue in recent years.

*2 & 7 project absolutely the wrong image in my view.

If ASF was my site then, for purely business reasons, I would not permit threads with those titles 2 & 7.

That is not a comment on the subject and in principle I support freedom of expression. From a purely business perspective though, society seems to have become far more conservative over the past ~20 years. It's not the 1980's "you have a right to free speech" world anymore, we're in an era now where the mere mention of some subjects provokes outrage and, from a business perspective, there's no reason for a stock market forum to go there. It's not going to gain even one new member but it will upset someone most likely. All loss, no gain.

The other political stuff I wouldn't ban but I do agree that it would be best for ASF's purpose and being focused if the number of threads were limited and at no time should become the dominant focus of the forum.

Fifth is the rudeness and so on.

A point I think everyone should remember is that we are all anonymous on this forum, with a few exceptions we do not know who each other personally in the offline world.

It's one thing to relate to your friends in the offline world in a certain way knowing how they perceive things and the relationship you have with them. It's very different when you're posting something that will be read by many, virtually all of whom know little about you. What's fine said face to face to someone you've known for 30 years can be taken very differently by someone else just reading it with no background knowledge.

Everyone should thus be polite and respectful at all times in my view. Regardless of the content of the post as such, once it turns to what looks to be rude then that's a massive turn off. Maybe there's some background that you actually know the other person you're responding to or whatever and they're fine with it but the other 99% of those reading only know what's in front of them.

Public communication 101 = speak to your audience. Whatever the audience walks away thinking you said, you're now stuck with that and if it's not the intended message then you, not them, is to blame for that. A point that someone drummed into me many years ago and which has served me well ever since.

I've never put anyone on "ignore" but there are a couple of posters to whom I give minimal credibility in practice yes and that applies to any post stocks or otherwise . Reason = repeated rudeness, trolling and so on casts them in a poor light.

There are people who are pedantic and argue the point for the sake of arguing and there are people who are pragmatic and who engage in the discussion in an effort to ascertain the facts or options. The latter are the ones who get things done in the real world.

 

[kahuna1]

There are people who are pedantic and argue the point for the sake of arguing and there are people who are pragmatic and who engage in the discussion in an effort to ascertain the facts or options. The latter are the ones who get things done in the real world.

Great post ... better than my effort. As someone who made a mistake with one of the thread you mentioned, also one not there, joining in only to find quite extreme views posted. Whilst I did express my disgust at them, openly and in light of recent events in NZ, I do not and cannot take them back. I would agree, it should not have been on this site.

As to Climate change, for me, and I am a very big macro economics person, I doubt there is in the very long term any issue that will dominate our investment over the next 100 years more than impact of climate change. It is beyond any rational debate that its occurring, with 97% of scientists in agreement and those who are not half are in the employ of the oil and coal industry. Again, not wishing to debate it ... your quote ..There are people who are pedantic and argue the point for the sake of arguing ... hit the nail upon the head.

The following are 200 plus scientific organizations that hold the position that Climate Change has been caused by human action: http://www.opr.ca.gov/facts/list-of-scientific-organizations.html

Its not complete and only about 200 ... but debate stopped a long time ago. When 50,000 scientists signed off on a paper at the IPCC and 200 Nobel prize winners in 2018 , and serious debate, and in this debating that the Great Barrier Reef is 25% of the size it was in 1985 is NOT possible, yet as you say ... its not a positive contribution to quote half baked rubbish. Then again, and I say this with respect, the world is NOT all that it seems. We have and not to be political but one must, a President of the USA who has denied it exists. I might add he has gone through and picked trade wars, tried open war, slashed humanitarian funding by the USA to less than 50% ... pulled out of the Untied nations efforts in 5 different areas ... and not to form debate or discussion, is quite openly racist and lies every 20 minutes.

The way I look at the world and have been quite accurate in the large MACRO global trends and able to see issues coming and where things top out, is by NOT looking just at the merits of a single company or industry but way way beyond that. The real drivers of the overall index and VALUATION of any asset are a long list of things. Number one is Interest rates, then Taxation and then GDP and Inflation and on an on this list goes into areas like policy and deficits and debts and so on.

Some things, and all things come at a cost. I will sound strange in saying this, but for now, USA is trading human life and welfare for gains in the stock market and money flowing to the top 1%. Again a can of worms, and how does one express that without triggering a lot of alarms in some ? USA with its baby boomers retiring has chosen, with a pathetic healthcare system, to NOT fund it. As such, companies now pay 21% tax, and the tax of the USA unlike the rest pf the world is 30% of GPD verse our own at 38% of GDP when GST and super are included .... and near 40% of GDP for the EU. The cost of course with NO healthcare is life expectancy. Quite clearly shown in their numbers, but even they are NOT and deliberately not correct, again, a contention ... but telling me Hispanics and Latinos with 20% uninsured in the USA live 3 years loner than say Peru with a great healthcare system that is free and universal and one see's the doctor 4 times MORE in Peru than the USA, medication costs 25% of the USA and so on. The real life expectancy is even worse than the terrible state reported by USA right now.

Confronting and whilst I would not debate this issue, it would be stupid to do so, the world has and is not all that it appears when say a recent study in the USA via Kaiser followed 6.2 million cancer sufferers and 2 years latter 42% had gone bankrupt due to the idiotic corrupt prices they pay when sick, number one cause of bankruptcy ? is Medical bills. In fact, 80% of all old people end up with NO assets, BROKE and on Medicaid which is emergency free medical care which AT BEST .. is HALF the service or our Own Medicare. HALF.

All of this can of worms is mixed up with multinationals not paying tax HERE to the tune of 30 billion a year, likely 26 billion in 2019 thanks to some new laws, but the likes of Microsoft with Australian sales of 3.6 billion, ONLY booking 600 million here, not paying GST on 3 billion and thats 300 million a year stolen let alone profits at 25% margin on 3.6 billion should mean 270 million TAX on 900 million profit earnt from sales here .... so 570 million stolen ,,, STOLEN from our economy by one company a year. Google makes Microsoft look HONEST. APPLE is even worse bu at least pays GST.

Again all relevant ,...

USA equities in short are on fire as they bring back 4 trillion in unpaid overseas profit, NOT just from Australia, the WORLD .... and its why their stocks rally rally rally. Its why ours and other nations DONT. Nations that care for their people .... and pay for universal healthcare ... one is operating with the overall welfare of all in mind ,,, paying around 40% of GDP in tax and the other ... USA ignores the pain of mainly non white 140 million or so and pays 30% of GDP in tax. I might add with a healthcare system costing RIGHT now DOUBLE and close to triple any other nation and at 20% of GDP it covers at best 70% verses say Canada's system or Mexico ... and if it went 100% cover at current costs, an absurd 30% of GDP on healthcare would be spent.

One is profiting via shortening human life and again not a debate ... the USA and its equities rule the global valuations and this current state of affairs transcends what one would normally call pure economics or share related matters. It is however .... WHAT dictates how we value stocks and all assets. Change is coming to the USA and whether in 2020 or 2024, universal healthcare will occur. Sadly likely with some serious disruption at a civil level let alone the economic impact of making drug makers, medical insurers and a lot of others in the USA worthless or worth 40% of current values.

Same on climate issues, whilst a very long thing, the IPCC is in agreement that 65cm MINIMUM sea rise by 2100, likely its 85 cm or more and USA right now Miami is sending 500 million on a system to pump water out of the city, much like New Orleans which is below sea level. Good luck to both.

In the meantime, don't fret. SP 500 is about to break NEW HIGHS and 2,920, I suspect goes as then the 3,000 target does ... and for me a perfect stopping place would be 3,150. All driven by, well things that have a cost, a cast that cannot go on, stealing tax off the rest of the world at 1-2% of GDP ... will stop and do so within 10 years and where would Apple be without a tax haven ? Or Google ...

Whilst this may seem broad, Joe knows who I am, which is irrelevant, but the very best managers, funds in the world, you will see this sort of very broad look at the world as whole on risks. Let alone the not mentioned issue of wealth inequality in the USA which has the lower 80% of people with a mere 9% of wealth v 24% in 1980. It cannot go on. Australia at 30% for the middle class ... v 9% speaks as to WHY life here is not a debate whether I can afford to buy pills or go to the doctor. Australia is utopia.

Sorry, digressed ... hope this helps Joe, and maybe others with their views and thoughts.

Thanks for hitting the proverbial nail on the head. Some just like to argue and be TROLLS is what I would say. Sadly, being human I do have boundaries and when someone says something disgusting, I tell them so. No apologies, just a lesson learnt not to go onto any religion based or topical thread. As to suffering fools and imbeciles ? I am one ... NUMBER one ...

There are people who are pedantic and argue the point for the sake of arguing

One which I don't mind. A robust discussion is what gets the topic fully open and often we both LEARN from each other.

There is however a deliberate TROLL type ... one that in today's world of lobby groups paid for by industry which like say the Tobacco industry of old quoted for a long time SMOKING was good for you.
Even large institutions are NOW in the USA utterly unreliable and in this I mean MASSIVE ones and when someone quotes back an article from a lobby group that factually is absurd ... easily seen to be so ... and its done time and time again, sometimes in the past it has been a Public relations firm doing the posting, in some cases the MD of a company .... I kid you not ...

On this and some food for thought ... the IMF and the World bank ... both sadly needing 85% of votes to do anything ,... and the USA has 16% voting power ... hold massive sway. In their case, looking at life expectancy numbers they publish, even USA official ones at 78.6 years life average ... on both they have the USA always at even official number PLUS 1-2 years .... so its 80 ... when the real number using EU or Australian methodology is likely 75 years, a SHOCKER .... but when you go to other nations ... and last time I looked our OWN life expectancy was 82.6 or so years but according to UP to date numbers via these supposed sites ... was 81 for Australia and 80 for USA gap being 1 year.

Even via official SOURCE data one is 78.6 years verses 82.6 years ...official gap 4 years .... using identical methodology in measurement its 75 verses 82.6 years, ONE is rising .... one is falling like a stone but of course NOT being reported. Real gap is 7.6 years UP ... 7.6 years since USA adopted drip down economics and bugger the poor.

Even tax collected, IMF says we collect 27% of GDP in tax ... when in fact its 38% ... they FORGOT to include GST ... and USA run its main old age super via Social Security and we run it VIA the tax office as well but its not allowed as we all know to be touched till age 67. One makes the USA non collection of tax look ok ...

On and on I could go with what now is reported as factual via official sources yet is NOT factual and easily seen as non factual. Again whilst seemingly outside the NORMAL discussion of stocks and shares. it is what WILL drive the overall valuation in the future.

Bottom line the USA will get universal healthcare sometime soon. The non taxing of the top 1% in the USA will stop as a result. Either that or the rest die age 65, which has implications as well. NON payment of tax overseas and even domestically to the tune of 21% corporate tax and GDP v TAX of a mere 30% on GDP and ignore the suffering of the lower 80%. THis is not a thing that has a time frame that can go on for more than 5-10 years. The lack of assets and income in the lower 80% of USA, and again our stocks are somewhat driven via the USA index's .... cannot continue and taking 24% of wealth in the lower 80% in 1980, not a great number but a good one ... to 9% now in 2019 ... and it heading into the top 1% in the USA ... bottom line there is NO more to give. The lower 80% have a mere 9% LEFT ....

Australia is utopia and WE have no idea. Our wealth is fairly well spread and having a middle class with 30% of all assets is as good as it gets !! We get sick, we go to the doctor. We DON'T GO BROKE when we get sick ... we have a decent and HUMANE welfare system. USA has none of this and some trying to change it are labelled Socialists or Communists for wanting ... FREE or low cost healthcare and decent wages. So too massive amounts earning under $10- an hour when health insurance for the family costs $600- a month is the NORM for the lower 50%.

A big intertwined MACRO bag of worms. Let alone the human aspects of this. Looking at the USA as someone who lived there for a long time, who loves the average American, things they do .... debates they have that SEEM to be about issues we have here, are none of the issues we face in our lovely nation.

Comparing one to the other, is hard, but investment wise, the direction of the USA and its markets is WHAT dictates world asset values to a great extent. We enter the end of the importance of the USA in all ways. EU is bigger and eventually will take a bigger role. Let alone China and then India and so on.

Basically, if one goes out .... all of it touches on many non investment type threads. If one is NOT aware of a polarization of politics in the USA, sadly one should be. Times they are a changing.

I have no idea how Joe deals with this ,,,, or at times heated discussions that get out of hand. I do understand SOME who quote a 1960 tobacco industry paper on the benifits of smoking are being honest. Some just like to argue ... SOME and its a deliberate trolling type, do it for kicks. Removing say half of what I wrote on 15 various investment sites and scientific ones over the course of 25 years is what would occur with too much restraint, as to content. No religion ,,, is fine ... until .. race and religion and economics get mixed together as they are in the modern world.

Food for Joe to think upon, or not. I have no bright ideas, sadly I know how stupid I am in this brave new world. Funny thing is, its all occurred prior to this and a cycle occurs, yet again .... we are at one extreme in the case of USA and many other issues.

 

[rederob]

First, the very nature of discussion is based on "beliefs" and I think it's fair to say that concept is somewhat at odds with the purpose of the forum.

So posting on a stock with views on its future price is other than belief?
Please enlighten me.

 

[SirRumpole]

Nice post Smurf.

I totally agree that there are a lot more things that affect the wider economy and the share market is a reactor to these things, not a determinant.

These inputs should be subjects for discussion imo, but if the site owner wants to concentrate narrowly on the effects of the inputs on the share market ie on share prices, then that's his call.

Some threads eg SSM, religion etc were probably over done, including by me but hopefully all the things that could be said on those topics have already been said so those threads will slow down.

Global warming is relevant imv, if it exists (and I believe it does) then it will have a major effect on the global economy. Insurance companies may well go out of business , but renewable energy, insulation and aircon and waste recycling companies not to mention electric cars and batteries will benefit.

PS your analysis of the electricity market have been classics and not to be missed. They probably relate to the share prices of the elcos in the long term so they are relevant.

 

[Ann]

Just my thoughts:

The first and foremost reason I visit this forum is for the "heads up" sort of posts relating to individual stocks. More analysis is always better but it doesn't overly bother me if it's lacking since it's still a "heads up" that something's going on and I should be taking a look at it myself.

Second is posts not relating to specific stocks but which have investment potential or implications for multiple companies are still of interest despite some of those being in the "General Chat" section. As examples I'll cite:

*Discussion about the taxation policies of the government or credible opposition parties (relevant to all investors).

*Issues with Boeing 737 aircraft (could turn out to be relevant to all airlines and is of relevance to anyone who invests in the US market and owns Boeing shares).

*The potential mass adoption of electric vehicles (affects pretty much every company involved with the automotive industry, the supply of conventional vehicle fuels, the entire electricity supply chain and has relevance to the producers of commodities used heavily in those vehicles - all up that's quite a number of ASX listed stocks including a few blue chips).

*Retail sales, shops closing etc (relevant to the companies involved, their direct competitors and if there's enough of them then it becomes relevant to shopping center owners, some of which are listed, and so on).

*House prices and general economics (directly and indirectly affects many stocks and of course owning property is itself an investment option, albeit not one that's the specific focus of this forum).

Cars, aviation, taxation, retail, houses - all "big" stuff really and it has an impact. It seems reasonable to me that they'd be topics here unless the aim is to turn ASF into a strict stock picking forum and that's it.

Third I'd put the "harmless" sort off topic stuff. Travel photos, someone has a new dog or went to a concert, whatever. Harmless in my view so long as it's a minor sideline to the main purpose of the forum. I've never seen any online forum that doesn't have a place where posts like that would be acceptable.

Fourth and the big one is politics and religion for the sake of politics and religion and which is discussing topics of no relevance to any ASX listed company or to investing in general.

That's where the problem is in my view and there are multiple reasons for that.

First, the very nature of discussion is based on "beliefs" and I think it's fair to say that concept is somewhat at odds with the purpose of the forum.

Second is the sheer volume of such discussion. If I'm looking for all the new posts on specific stocks then it's one thing to have some stuff about unsafe aircraft and taxation policies mixed in, there's a limited number of such subjects so as long as they're contained to a single thread on that topic they can't really crowd out the stock posts, but it's another thing entirely when literally the whole page comes up full of nothing other than multiple threads about politics and religion none of which are relevant to even one listed company.

Third is that such posts tend to be a magnet for rudeness and so on and that is a huge turn off.

Looking through the 12 most recent threads in General Chat, some observations:

1. Is Global Warming becoming unstoppable?

2. A perspective of Racism amd White Privilege in the US

3. Religion, Science, Scepticism, Philosophy and things metaphysical

4. Electric cars?

5. Big Pharma and Ethics = Oxymoron?

6. Sell WA to China

7. Chinese influence in Australia

8. Useless Labor Party

9: 50% of managers could be psychopaths: research

10. Peter Dutton - The Great Pretender?

11. Boeing 737 Max: Death Aircraft

12. Thread: No more than 5 words per post and doesn't annoy others

Now I haven't read every post in all those but looking at the title and a brief look at content:

*4, 5, 6, 9 and 11 have at least some relevance to ASX listed stocks, investing or business. I don't see them as out of place on a stick market forum.

*12 is totally off topic but harmless (note I haven't read the whole thread).

*1, 3, 8, 10 = religion and politics. I've included climate change in that category since whilst I do see it as a problem, any investment potential mostly relates to things covered in other threads (eg electric cars or renewable energy) and the issue is mainstream political more than practically any other issue in recent years.

*2 & 7 project absolutely the wrong image in my view.

If ASF was my site then, for purely business reasons, I would not permit threads with those titles 2 & 7.

That is not a comment on the subject and in principle I support freedom of expression. From a purely business perspective though, society seems to have become far more conservative over the past ~20 years. It's not the 1980's "you have a right to free speech" world anymore, we're in an era now where the mere mention of some subjects provokes outrage and, from a business perspective, there's no reason for a stock market forum to go there. It's not going to gain even one new member but it will upset someone most likely. All loss, no gain.

The other political stuff I wouldn't ban but I do agree that it would be best for ASF's purpose and being focused if the number of threads were limited and at no time should become the dominant focus of the forum.

Fifth is the rudeness and so on.

A point I think everyone should remember is that we are all anonymous on this forum, with a few exceptions we do not know who each other personally in the offline world.

It's one thing to relate to your friends in the offline world in a certain way knowing how they perceive things and the relationship you have with them. It's very different when you're posting something that will be read by many, virtually all of whom know little about you. What's fine said face to face to someone you've known for 30 years can be taken very differently by someone else just reading it with no background knowledge.

Everyone should thus be polite and respectful at all times in my view. Regardless of the content of the post as such, once it turns to what looks to be rude then that's a massive turn off. Maybe there's some background that you actually know the other person you're responding to or whatever and they're fine with it but the other 99% of those reading only know what's in front of them.

Public communication 101 = speak to your audience. Whatever the audience walks away thinking you said, you're now stuck with that and if it's not the intended message then you, not them, is to blame for that. A point that someone drummed into me many years ago and which has served me well ever since.

I've never put anyone on "ignore" but there are a couple of posters to whom I give minimal credibility in practice yes and that applies to any post stocks or otherwise . Reason = repeated rudeness, trolling and so on casts them in a poor light.

There are people who are pedantic and argue the point for the sake of arguing and there are people who are pragmatic and who engage in the discussion in an effort to ascertain the facts or options. The latter are the ones who get things done in the real world.

Superb analyses as always Smurf!

For many years I had no interest what-so-ever in General Chat. They were just headings that popped up and then disappeared. However when one looks closer there is so much in General Chat that relates directly to stocks as Smurf has said. I have broadened my horizons and now see how a flow one way or another will directly affect the stockmarket. Perhaps Joe could get an Ignore button for General Chat, in fact for all sections in the new update. Maybe the constant appearance of Commodities may annoy some people. I have a specific section I would love to put on Ignore, but never people.

I tend to be one of the main people being accused of stupidity and suffering from Dementia and a whole assortment of other derogatory comments from a very few. How do I feel about it? It really doesn't bother me particularly Joe. All through my life there have been people who have tried to intimidate me. I just keep going along on my merry way and these folk eventually fall to the wayside. I have found they tend to do themselves more harm than me with their derision.

 

[PZ99]

For those who want to ignore general chat...

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/posts/954940/

 

[Ann]

For those who want to ignore general chat...

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/posts/954940/

Yay! Thank you PZ99. So if GC, Commodities or any sections annoy you flick 'em.

 

[kahuna1]

Ann,

You among other things have YOURSELF discussed your adult dyslexia aka Dementia, along with 26 years of chronic fatigue, along with spinal arthritis, along with depression. post natal depression and a host of other ailments. How your son born in 1984 or 1986 is some issue .... Please try not to play the victim.

Having over the course of 10 plus years, endured your love of being the opposite and quoting what is always the opposing view on a lot of topics, its amusing when your presented with deliberate out of date tobacco industry studies or similar, time and time again, on thread after thread, you think its funny or relevant ? Amusing till it occurs on 25 issues, stocks, markets or whatever and always ... same stuff same people same games.

Supposedly you do.

This is not a personal attack, its a pattern. Whether its the dyslexia or whatever, denying the very existence of say climate change on a thread about WHETHER it can be stopped, NOT whether its real. The thread is discussing what is a reality for 97% of the scientific community and that aside, going onto a thread, DENYING it exists when its ... a thread for BELIEVERS ... whether you think they are delusional or NOT ... going onto that thread and GOING its all fake ?

The current climate change thread ... is it stoppable ... is a prime example.

Ann ... YOU ... Time and time and time again, troll ... bait .... troll ... bait ... present views that are well ... rubbish and on and on it goes. the poor guys there your currently playing with, and I stopped accepting it was a sadistic game on your part, the poor guys one asked to get taken off ASF, the other two I suspect are close to it.

This is not an isolated incident but a pattern. Not being personal, but ... sadly honest having had to endure your rubbish for 10 years, on a whole list of topics ... I have tried to understand. Is it the non comprehension of English or words as you said yourself ? I don't know. I sadly suspect its more.

Of course, as time ticks away there are more and more of these things online. If you feel I am being rude pointing out your OWN stated medical conditions, I do not apologize. I have taken a lot of time to try and understand your views, quite obviously read I a lot of your posts, to try and understand the reasons WHY you post this way.

I have PUT you on ignore and unfortunately when I take you off it, up sprouts .. well poor me yet again.

We all are different and me most of all. Imperfect in the extreme. I do however have boundaries as we all do. I would prefer not to have pointed this out, but Joe ... is between a rock and hard place dealing with any and all of these issues.

I have no brilliant ideas so I shall crawl back into my hole and leave with this ...

TROLLS ...

 

[Joe Blow]

Great post Smurf.

The first and foremost reason I visit this forum is for the "heads up" sort of posts relating to individual stocks. More analysis is always better but it doesn't overly bother me if it's lacking since it's still a "heads up" that something's going on and I should be taking a look at it myself.

This is what ASF was originally created for. Not everyone is capable of in-depth analysis but we are all capable of posting news, announcements or other information relevant to a particular stock, industry or sector.

It's not hard to post in a stock thread with some useful or relevant information and it does help keep the focus of ASF where it needs to be.

Third I'd put the "harmless" sort off topic stuff. Travel photos, someone has a new dog or went to a concert, whatever. Harmless in my view so long as it's a minor sideline to the main purpose of the forum. I've never seen any online forum that doesn't have a place where posts like that would be acceptable.

And this is what should be the purpose of an off-topic area such as the General Chat forum. It should be an adjunct to the main purpose of the forum, not the focus. Ideally it is a place where we can get away from the markets for a while in the evening or on the weekend and discuss topics that aren't so serious.

If General Chat has become the focus of a forum built around another specific area of interest then something has gone terribly wrong. And clearly it has here.

Fourth and the big one is politics and religion for the sake of politics and religion and which is discussing topics of no relevance to any ASX listed company or to investing in general.

That's where the problem is in my view and there are multiple reasons for that.

First, the very nature of discussion is based on "beliefs" and I think it's fair to say that concept is somewhat at odds with the purpose of the forum.

Second is the sheer volume of such discussion. If I'm looking for all the new posts on specific stocks then it's one thing to have some stuff about unsafe aircraft and taxation policies mixed in, there's a limited number of such subjects so as long as they're contained to a single thread on that topic they can't really crowd out the stock posts, but it's another thing entirely when literally the whole page comes up full of nothing other than multiple threads about politics and religion none of which are relevant to even one listed company.

Third is that such posts tend to be a magnet for rudeness and so on and that is a huge turn off.

I'm not sure I can recall another time in my life where political discussion was so black and white and relentlessly dogmatic as it is now. For some reason, ideological purity and the denouncing of those with different views as enemies and apostates appears to be the norm these days. In the increasingly secular western world, I think that politics may be replacing religion as the primary unchangeable and unquestionable belief system. Politics now has its own prophets who pander to those of a particular political bent and who write books and hold rallies to cash in on the devotion of their followers. I won't mention any names but there any many of them.

But to address your third point, this is where the rudeness comes from. It comes from the perception of others who hold different political views as an enemy, rather than as someone who has simply come to different conclusions about the the way our society should be managed. Now, instead of serious debate and discussion, we have insults and bile spitting from ideological trenches and nothing useful or constructive is ever accomplished. It only serves to create an ugly, toxic atmosphere that permeates the whole community.

It is both unpleasant and regrettable.

That is not a comment on the subject and in principle I support freedom of expression. From a purely business perspective though, society seems to have become far more conservative over the past ~20 years. It's not the 1980's "you have a right to free speech" world anymore, we're in an era now where the mere mention of some subjects provokes outrage and, from a business perspective, there's no reason for a stock market forum to go there. It's not going to gain even one new member but it will upset someone most likely. All loss, no gain.

The other political stuff I wouldn't ban but I do agree that it would be best for ASF's purpose and being focused if the number of threads were limited and at no time should become the dominant focus of the forum.

I support freedom of expression too, but clearly there are limits. It is true we have become far more conservative in recent times and it applies equally to both the left and the right. The level of outrage over things that wouldn't have caused people to think twice 30 years ago is at an all time high. Political correctness and oversensitivity is now all pervasive in our culture and it is something that I have found difficult to adapt to simply because I came from that 1980's "you have a right to free speech" world that you mentioned and my instinct tells me that most censorship is counterproductive and that there are very few topics that should be off-limits.

But times have changed and heavy handed moderation and censorship is now commonplace and not only accepted but expected. I still struggle with this.

A point I think everyone should remember is that we are all anonymous on this forum, with a few exceptions we do not know who each other personally in the offline world.

It's one thing to relate to your friends in the offline world in a certain way knowing how they perceive things and the relationship you have with them. It's very different when you're posting something that will be read by many, virtually all of whom know little about you. What's fine said face to face to someone you've known for 30 years can be taken very differently by someone else just reading it with no background knowledge.

Everyone should thus be polite and respectful at all times in my view. Regardless of the content of the post as such, once it turns to what looks to be rude then that's a massive turn off. Maybe there's some background that you actually know the other person you're responding to or whatever and they're fine with it but the other 99% of those reading only know what's in front of them.

Yes, the rudeness and disrespect needs to stop. There is no need for it. If you cannot find any common ground with another participant in a discussion then cease all interaction. Put them on ignore if you can't stomach their posts. Take the high road and move on. Life's too short to be having pointless arguments with others on the internet.

 

[nulla nulla]

This is a clip that I lifted from a post on the aussiestockforum site many years ago. I find it helps me keep the internet (and internet users) in perspective.



Enjoy.

 

[Smurf1976]

I support freedom of expression too, but clearly there are limits. It is true we have become far more conservative in recent times and it applies equally to both the left and the right. The level of outrage over things that wouldn't have caused people to think twice 30 years ago is at an all time high. Political correctness and oversensitivity is now all pervasive in our culture and it is something that I have found difficult to adapt to simply because I came from that 1980's "you have a right to free speech" world that you mentioned and my instinct tells me that most censorship is counterproductive and that there are very few topics that should be off-limits.

Agreed with your comments.

Using a current example regarding the sacking of a rugby player for posting "offensive" comments online.

Whilst I strongly disagree with his comments as such, I do firmly consider that he has the right to make them noting that he's really only quoting sections of the Bible, a book which has wide acceptance in society.

Supporting "diversity" by its very nature means you accept those with views markedly different to your own. That's the very nature of diversity - some will have views directly opposite to your own, few will agree outright with you, and most will be somewhere between the two extremes.

I think society has reached a point where there's rather a lot of people saying they support "x" but far fewer willing to really support it in practice when it comes to the crunch and they realise what's really involved.

In the context of this forum I'll note that one thing's for sure. You, I and anyone else aren't going to learn anything simply by reading posts which tell us what we already know and agree with. Where we'll learn is by being exposed to new ideas and by taking the time to understand exactly what those with an opposing view are saying and how they reached that position. That applies to investing most certainly.

 

[Smurf1976]

So posting on a stock with views on its future price is other than belief?
Please enlighten me.

For clarity, I'm taking the word "belief" to mean a view that something is true or false which is not proven by factual evidence and which is not negotiable.

That's not quite the dictionary definition but it's reasonably close and is what I mean in this context.

Eg someone who "believes" in the existence of God and who is a Christian most likely hasn't sought to objectively prove this and, more to the point, is unlikely to undertake a periodic review to assess whether they should remain a Christian or should instead become a Muslim or atheist. Their belief in God and Christianity is fixed and not up for negotiation.

Those who are "rusted on" to voting for the same political party are much the same. Their position is fixed and not negotiable regardless of any factual argument.

In the context of investing, a more pragmatic approach based on analysis of available information is more appropriate and I consider that to be a very different thing when compared to a fixed non-negotiable belief.

If the facts change then that may well change someone's opinion of a situation but it won't generally change their beliefs which are fixed.

So that's what I actually mean (as distinct from any technical definitions of language etc).

 

[barney]

I firmly consider he has the right to make them

I think society has reached a point where there's rather a lot of people saying they support "x" but far fewer willing to really support it in practice when it comes to the crunch and they realise what's really involved.

Where we'll learn is by being exposed to new ideas

More excellent points Smurf

 

[rederob]

In the context of investing, a more pragmatic approach based on analysis of available information is more appropriate and I consider that to be a very different thing when compared to a fixed non-negotiable belief.

While the background to your belief is admirable (and I wholly agree with it in practice relating to investing), I am not sure everyone's "beliefs" in the other areas are necessarily "bolted on."
I was christened, but am an igtheist.
I have no view on which political party is going to do a better job, so I choose the local candidate that I believe is most likely to represent the interests I wish to be progressed in coming years. Swinging voters change governments!
Posting on a stock, imho, is not a superior "belief." Despite thorough technical and fundamental analysis (and therefore a "justifiable belief"), any number of events can nullify the hard work.
So to this, next:

Where we'll learn is by being exposed to new ideas and by taking the time to understand exactly what those with an opposing view are saying and how they reached that position.

And again I agree with your sentiment.
However, it can be applied across all your 12 threads, except #12 can be tricky for some.

 

[SirRumpole]

Using a current example regarding the sacking of a rugby player for posting "offensive" comments online.

Whilst I strongly disagree with his comments as such, I do firmly consider that he has the right to make them noting that he's really only quoting sections of the Bible, a book which has wide acceptance in society.

Quite right. The sacking of Folau is just another example of the nanny state in action.

Why can't people just say "we disagree with what he says", and move on a quickly as possible ?

 

[kahuna1]

For clarity, I'm taking the word "belief" to mean a view that something is true or false which is not proven by factual evidence and which is not negotiable.

Yep, I hear you, but part of the issue is WHAT IS FACTS ?

So many things in investments are quoted as facts, even values of companies. When and if you can pull apart the assumptions or methodology, say in the case of Dick Smith when it was floated, you find its a set of rubbish.

On other things, even all of history, sadly, we forget, or are not taught, or because its not in our background, we have no idea.

A lot, is in self interest, or for financial gain, is the presentation of non factual and not even close information. If I can sell you something worth $1- for $100- because I can produce a report that says its worth $200- ... this is how a lot of things operate.

The negotiability of FACTS and even scientific in nature, where it occurs the same way, every time, is sadly in these modern times, is even open for denial.

Drip down economist, or Regressive tax that has Bill Gates paying 12% on the income he declares, which is NOT much, but still Buffett on 50 million a year paying 15% and a person on 100k pays overall close to 35% tax in the USA. This ... has never worked, not once and not in over a million examples in the past 2,000 years. More so in modern times.

If you take, 5% MORE tax from someone who consumes 100% of their income, and give it to someone who only consumes 5% of their income, it, is stupidity on drugs. We don't have that here in Australia but the USA does. Examples of Indian Maharajahs and 2000 years of them, each with 40 years average taxing the poor, never led to greater overall prosperity.

Some, would argue till their blue in the face, and do, what to a well qualified Macro Economist is simple common sense. Even here, there is a group, about 5% of the Economists that would argue the opposite. Again till they are blue in the face.

Its not about being right or wrong, its actually irrelevant. Its not about converting someone to your belief, or even up to a point ... for me, I have on occasion taken the time to try and hose down scam stocks and various things. Its not something I often do, because, even presenting factual, empirical, data on what is wrong, is sadly lost on fan bases.

I am not sure, even of one can try and get scientific for many in today's world. One can point out the argument and data presented back is out of date, incomplete, idiotic, wrong methodology and present that back, but in 99% of the cases I have tried, its akin to selling sand in the desert.

Fear and greed often drive investment prices. Fear and greed run at times economics, nations and policies. So too cruelty and lack of compassion at times.

Telling the truth, in investments is rare. A company has its product no one is buying, one never hears the MD going this is rubbish. That is not his function. Politics, its rare to hear someone say I got that wrong. More often we are sold fear of the bogey man. YK2 ? What happened with that ? I still sit here waiting for it. OR the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq ? the CIA and FBI convinced the world they had ? Pompeo is now Trumps secretary of State and head of the FBI back then Mueller just did a report on Trumps Russian involvement.

Amusing but true. The guy who with Oliver North sent guns to the Contra's selling oil for Iran, which the contras did horrible things to people with, and the president of that nation is in jail for now, the USA guy who was neck deep with Oliver North, is now the USA special envoy about Venezuela.

This is the leadership of the world. Investment side, well all those people who ripped off so many in the GFC, not one ... not a single one went to jail. Far from it, they were and have been rewarded for their efforts.

A strange strange world where, up is down, down is up, some of it has been going on since the dawn of time.

If I can convince you to buy the harbor bridge off me for 100 million .... and because I like you ... 20% discount ... only 80 million, I will.


OK MY LAST OFFER .... 70 million if you pay today!

 

[basilio]

Last few pages have been some of the best posts I have read on ASF for a long time.
Thoughtful, respectful, informative and constructive.
Good stuff.

 

[basilio]

Yep, I hear you, but part of the issue is WHAT IS FACTS ?

So many things in investments are quoted as facts, even values of companies. When and if you can pull apart the assumptions or methodology, say in the case of Dick Smith when it was floated, you find its a set of rubbish.

On other things, even all of history, sadly, we forget, or are not taught, or because its not in our background, we have no idea.

A lot, is in self interest, or for financial gain, is the presentation of non factual and not even close information. If I can sell you something worth $1- for $100- because I can produce a report that says its worth $200- ... this is how a lot of things operate.

The negotiability of FACTS and even scientific in nature, where it occurs the same way, every time, is sadly in these modern times, is even open for denial.

Drip down economist, or Regressive tax that has Bill Gates paying 12% on the income he declares, which is NOT much, but still Buffett on 50 million a year paying 15% and a person on 100k pays overall close to 35% tax in the USA. This ... has never worked, not once and not in over a million examples in the past 2,000 years. More so in modern times.

If you take, 5% MORE tax from someone who consumes 100% of their income, and give it to someone who only consumes 5% of their income, it, is stupidity on drugs. We don't have that here in Australia but the USA does. Examples of Indian Maharajahs and 2000 years of them, each with 40 years average taxing the poor, never led to greater overall prosperity.

Some, would argue till their blue in the face, and do, what to a well qualified Macro Economist is simple common sense. Even here, there is a group, about 5% of the Economists that would argue the opposite. Again till they are blue in the face.

Its not about being right or wrong, its actually irrelevant. Its not about converting someone to your belief, or even up to a point ... for me, I have on occasion taken the time to try and hose down scam stocks and various things. Its not something I often do, because, even presenting factual, empirical, data on what is wrong, is sadly lost on fan bases.

I am not sure, even of one can try and get scientific for many in today's world. One can point out the argument and data presented back is out of date, incomplete, idiotic, wrong methodology and present that back, but in 99% of the cases I have tried, its akin to selling sand in the desert.

Fear and greed often drive investment prices. Fear and greed run at times economics, nations and policies. So too cruelty and lack of compassion at times.

Telling the truth, in investments is rare. A company has its product no one is buying, one never hears the MD going this is rubbish. That is not his function. Politics, its rare to hear someone say I got that wrong. More often we are sold fear of the bogey man. YK2 ? What happened with that ? I still sit here waiting for it. OR the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq ? the CIA and FBI convinced the world they had ? Pompeo is now Trumps secretary of State and head of the FBI back then Mueller just did a report on Trumps Russian involvement.

Amusing but true. The guy who with Oliver North sent guns to the Contra's selling oil for Iran, which the contras did horrible things to people with, and the president of that nation is in jail for now, the USA guy who was neck deep with Oliver North, is now the USA special envoy about Venezuela.

This is the leadership of the world. Investment side, well all those people who ripped off so many in the GFC, not one ... not a single one went to jail. Far from it, they were and have been rewarded for their efforts.

A strange strange world where, up is down, down is up, some of it has been going on since the dawn of time.

If I can convince you to buy the harbor bridge off me for 100 million .... and because I like you ... 20% discount ... only 80 million, I will.


OK MY LAST OFFER .... 70 million if you pay today!

Very, very good point Kahuna. In fact one of the most potent values in ASF is people offering clear information on the truth of particular investments when they have good, generally inside, information.

I agree with you that much of what passes for investor information by Companies is self serving and often quite misleading or even deceitful.
The (potential) value of being in ASF is sharing insights that separate the wheat from the chaff and enable investors to avoid some of the most outrageous cons and find the companies with quality products and competent quality management.