Quote from jaguar1952:
As far as the shill, scam and other personal attacks .... besides being mis-informed, you are also a fool.
I am only responding to your posts, in the last one specifically how you ignore pertinent information. Specifically, that it does not make sense to invest in a product after the demonstration fails, and miserably at that. If that makes me a fool, ok, I guess we can start arguing about the definition of a fool.
But only a fool would attack the character of someone they do not know
Actually whether I know you or not is irrelevant. I am responding to your public posts. If your public posts are equivalent to your character then so be it. Apparently I am a fool and you are a hedge fund manager surfing trade rooms for methodologies that net 1 point or so, but not everday. I highly suggest people do their own research on this claim. That alone is soooo far fetched, so ludicrous its amazing.
I beg anyone who doesn't know any better to ask anyone they can trust about this claim and you'll find the response to be a smile and/or laughter followed by a short story to explain.
If we were face to face and I was dressed in rags, you could properly conclude that I may be a hobo. But in a text forum like this, that kind of argumentation just shows how unqualified your assessment of things really is.
Who you are is much less relevant than what you say, and again I'm responding to your posts pointing out contradictions, etc. That's the beautiful part about an anonymous forum, prejudices can be set aside. On a side note, in Niederhoffer's book Education of a Speculator a hobo's knowledge actually makes him a lot of money, on a regular basis. I don't remember exactly if he employs him or just consults, but quite a good read.
Like it or not, your or my assessment of anything is filtered through our prejudices and experiences.
Without getting into a conversation about psychology that no one is interested in, of course you are right generally speaking. SPECIFICALLY though, there's nothing "prejudiced" or "filtered" about stating it is not a wise investment to purchase a product who's demonstration fails, and miserably at that. Among the other comments on value, free information, magazines, books, other systems, other rooms, etc. Those either do or don't exist, nothing to do with prejudice. [/B][/QUOTE]
But I do take it personally when someone accuses me of bad things, or attacks me personally verbally in this annonymous forum. It's cowardly and speaks volumes of the type of person you are.
Giving some thought to definition of coward, I can't say it's cowardly to: point out that you ignore and / or warp what I say in your replies, for example. If you don't like being "attacked" for that then I suggest you stop doing so. It's also not cowardly to point out correlations between your behavior and that of a shill. Either they are similar or they aren't and people can judge for themselves like you keep suggesting.
By your definition, anyone here who disagrees in any forum in any post is a "coward" and "attacks personally" then right?
I did ask you before, do you work in PR?
I hope those reading these strings do their own homework about this or any other topic, and do not take anyone else's word for the validity of any information, but always do their own research.
Funny, we both suggest people do their own homework. Here's the difference:
Your definition: homework is giving money to Lav and Grumpee.
My definition: reading books, magazines, testing freely available systems, screen time, etc
I think the difference between those last two sums things up nicely.
