Quote from jimrockford:
Well, if this is how you talk about somebody who agrees with you most of the time, when you say you don't intend to offend anyone, I can only imagine how nasty you must become when you are truly in conflict and really DO intend to offend people. I'm sure you'll have greater constructive influence on IB if you try a little harder in the anger management department.
u get up to people nerves, go back and read all the replies to posters that disagree with u, maybe u'll get a clue.
Perhaps you shouldn't spew name-calling and insulting comments about what others should do, since you are unwilling to reciprocate by tolerating polite guidance from others as to what you yourself should do.
polite guidance? like if anyone is really cravin' for your sermons; u are pompous and insufferable, always bent on patronizin' others. as i said, u get up to people nerves.
It is regrettable that you are so prepared to insult people and call names, yet you were totally unprepared when IBsoft invited you to discuss your criticism in a constructive and specific way.
sorry if u got offended cuz i called u a tool and if reality rings a bell and, ror, i was actually tradin'; am not usually in a postin spree mood like u durin' tradin' hours.
You have a great deal of worthwhile criticism to offer, both to ET and to IB, despite your poor delivery. Congratulations are due to IBsoft for overlooking your attitude problem, and for remaining open to the substance of your input.
u got a great deal of gettin' your nose into other people affairs and your attitude stinks even more than mine since u twist and turn everythin' at your convenience. and, my, my, have we so quickly forgotten how bent u are on criticizin [may i say bashin'?] the nyse and those who disagree with u non-stop? half your posts are about the spec screwin' up your trades, R0R.