- Joined
- 17 August 2006
- Posts
- 7,903
- Reactions
- 8,616
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.
Just my thoughts: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.
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.
So posting on a stock with views on its future price is other than belief?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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Agreed with your comments.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.
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.So posting on a stock with views on its future price is other than belief?
Please enlighten me.
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
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."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.
And again I agree with your sentiment.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.
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.
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!
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?