73 replies to this topic

[Mr Dev]

time and time again when it comes to explaining yourself, you are not relevant until after multiple request to explain yourself.

remember back, when i answered you with the same inadequacy 3 or 4 times how frustrated you became ?

i played your own game on you, and you reacted.

i dont have time to ck or go back and ck every message you final make clear, and i dont expect that other readers do either.

so im done !

Edited by Mr Dev, 07 December 2012 - 10:00 AM.

[fib_1618]

time and time again when it comes to explaining yourself, you are not relevant until after multiple request to explain yourself.

remember back, when i answered you with the same inadequacy 3 or 4 times how frustrated you became ?

I have no idea what you're talking about, but I do know that you are one of many that posts charts and conveniently block out the settings.

And then when someone dares to ask, you are nowhere to be seen...or you "move on".

To explain myself? Like all so many who make "drive by" posts and never respond to questions asked?

I don't have to explain myself, but I do give specific replies to specific questions when it comes to technical analysis.

And if I don't, maybe I missed it, or maybe, just maybe, I've been just too busy to come back to the board to look for it. Unlike others, I don't live here on the board. I do have a life outside of providing analytical input to those who may ask questions either directly or indirectly.

So here you go Dev...here's your opportunity...ask as many questions as you wish and I will give you full and detailed answers. I will make time for you.

Oh...and by the way, since we're taking off our gloves here, your use of the "cumulative NASDAQ McClellan Oscillator" is, IN FACT, the NASDAQ McClellan Summation Index. So it might be better served if you use the proper reference in your analysis.

Fib

P.S. And if any of the moderators close this thread, I'm gone...for good.

[claire]

Fib --FWIW: I hope you won't construe this as a criticism. I don't think you are aware that some of your comments may be confusing. I always look forward to reading what you have to say, but I find that often I need to re-read what you say to try to understand and often give up trying to decipher what you may mean. I assume that it's often my limited understanding of technicals which has me confused, but frequently your statement just seem cryptic. I think you're trying to help the reader to think about the implications of your or their comments, but such a dialogue doesn't seem to work and may sound condescending or just critical. I think this is what leads to misunderstandings and hurt feelings. Written communication lends itself to this kind of problem more often than face-to-face discussions where the intent can be seen from other cues.

[fib_1618]

Fib --FWIW: I hope you won't construe this as a criticism. I don't think you are aware that some of your comments may be confusing. I always look forward to reading what you have to say, but I find that often I need to re-read what you say to try to understand and often give up trying to decipher what you may mean. I assume that it's often my limited understanding of technicals which has me confused, but frequently your statement just seem cryptic. I think you're trying to help the reader to think about the implications of your or their comments, but such a dialogue doesn't seem to work and may sound condescending or just critical. I think this is what leads to misunderstandings and hurt feelings. Written communication lends itself to this kind of problem more often than face-to-face discussions where the intent can be seen from other cues.

Thank you for your feedback Claire...it's very much appreciated.

Yes, much of what I respond to has tended to be cryptic, especially to those who actually know their way around a chart, but for whatever reason, have decided that what "worked" before either no longer applies and don't want to engage in the art of discussion in possibly putting them back on the right track. This is, in fact, is the crux of this current discussion with Mr. Dev when he says: "I'm not completely throwing out the technicals just yet but here are a number of reasons why i think we shouldn't be relying on them for now." This is a sentiment indicator of frustration, if anything else, and indeed THE point of my initial reply.

I am more than willing to lead many to the answer, but I also have to remember that since I have made so many poignant analytical posts over the years that can be referred to, I don't want to beat a dead horse either or make me look like I'm beating my own chest. But without any kind of follow up question, it really becomes all a guess as to how much is too much without sounding demeaning in the process.

Anyway...ask your questions and I will make the effort to answer them. I have NEVER run away from anything, and to be candid, that could be the biggest misunderstanding as I can be like the proverbial gnat at times in my effort to keep the discussion on point.

Fib

Edited by fib_1618, 07 December 2012 - 10:49 AM.

[claire]

Fib --FWIW: I hope you won't construe this as a criticism. I don't think you are aware that some of your comments may be confusing. I always look forward to reading what you have to say, but I find that often I need to re-read what you say to try to understand and often give up trying to decipher what you may mean. I assume that it's often my limited understanding of technicals which has me confused, but frequently your statement just seem cryptic. I think you're trying to help the reader to think about the implications of your or their comments, but such a dialogue doesn't seem to work and may sound condescending or just critical. I think this is what leads to misunderstandings and hurt feelings. Written communication lends itself to this kind of problem more often than face-to-face discussions where the intent can be seen from other cues.

Thank you for your feedback Claire...it's very much appreciated.

Yes, much of what I respond to has tended to be cryptic, especially to those who actually know their way around a chart, but for whatever reason, have decided that what "worked" before either no longer applies and don't want to engage in the art of discussion in possibly putting them back on the right track. This is, in fact, is the crux of this current discussion with Mr. Dev when he says: "I'm not completely throwing out the technicals just yet but here are a number of reasons why i think we shouldn't be relying on them for now." This is a sentiment indicator of frustration, if anything else, and indeed THE point of my initial reply.

I am more than willing to lead many to the answer, but I also have to remember that since I have made so many poignant analytical posts over the years that can be referred to, I don't want to beat a dead horse either or make me look like I'm beating my own chest. But without any kind of follow up question, it really becomes all a guess as to how much is too much without sounding demeaning in the process.

Anyway...ask your questions and I will make the effort to answer them. I have NEVER run away from anything, and to be candid, that could be the biggest misunderstanding as I can be like the proverbial gnat at times in my effort to keep the discussion on point.

Fib

[claire]

Sorry for the double post. I accidentally removed my response. Fib, Thanks for being so open. I think that is precisely what's going on. You enjoy Socratic dialogues and hope that an intellectual discussion will lead to an open debate, which has occurred in the past on this forum and has been fascinating and very illuminating, but often these dissolve into more personal rather than intellectual discussions. You have always answered any questions I've asked, but still, you do scare me a bit. I imagine you rolling your eyes up at my limited understanding, which likely isn't happening at all and would be clear if we were face-to-face. You seem to be a natural teacher, and I believe you genuinely want to be helpful, but, frankly, sometimes I don't want to understand (which would help me be more independent and which I "should" want), but I just want the "answer" of what you expect at the moment. I assume this may be very frustrating to you since you seem to enjoy passing along your expertise and, understandably, it would be more satisfying to you if others learn from your experience. Others here, who are much more knowledgeable, may feel put-down from questions about their assumptions or conclusions. Again, I doubt this would happen were the conversations in person, rather than written, where your intent would be more apparent. Soooooo, it's all nothing more than a big misunderstanding, and let's all be friends!

[fib_1618]

I don't want to understand (which would help me be more independent and which I "should" want), but I just want the "answer" of what you expect at the moment.

Goes under the category of "Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime" doesn't it?

And I wouldn't call it scared as it might be intimidating, but to be fair, I don't call anyone or anything derogatory, as I'm fully aware that there is another human being on the other side of the screen that has feelings and their own life challenges. I take great care in my posts because of this. In fact, I may read them 3 or 4 times before posting just so there's no misinterpretation. But what we can't help is how others "perceive" comments made and the accents that go with them.

Such is the problems of this medium I guess, though it would be in the boards best interest that when others disagree that they at least post stuff that isn't pretentious in their content.

Now notice, if you will, not one question....not even a link to past discussions. Times have indeed changed on this board...too bad.

Onward.

Fib

[andiron]

all I want to ask that if Fib has really mastered TA - and if indeed this TA can be relied upon to predict future price movement of the stock market - that it must follow that FIB, or any such person, should show considerable monetary gains...year after year.... so all i ask is show me the money pal....... unless, of course, we are just talking of some theories just for the heck of it...

[fib_1618]

so all i ask is show me the money pal.......

How much money/account total do I have to show to "satisfy" your request?

$1000?

$10,000?

$100,000?

$1,000,000?

$10,000,000?

What exactly do you hope to gain from knowing my capital net worth as opposed to learning something that might be enriching enough to somehow increase your own?

Your priorities, sir, sure seem to be out of whack. But then again, maybe it's just me and not keeping up with the times.

Fib

[risk_management]

so all i ask is show me the money pal.......

Your priorities, sir, sure seem to be out of whack. But then again, maybe it's just me and not keeping up with the times.

Fib

Yearly results should be number one priority for anyone claiming to know anything in this business. Folks posting yearly returns and/or posting clear entries/exits deserve the most respect. The rest...