Faker point average?

[Bogan7]

Is there a way to derive mathematically who is a real trader on this board?

One way came to me and i am not a quant but i thought what about dividing the number of posts by the time they have been members to give a rough posts per day figure. With the higher the number the higher the probablity the guy is a faker.

Most real traders are probably too busy to post here more than a few times a day at most (with exceptions I am sick and cant leave my flat today)

Maybe that can become part of our proflie next to the number of posts figure?

Cheers

 

[ronblack]

Quote from Bogan7:

Is there a way to derive mathematically who is a real trader on this board? Cheers

Have you thought of the possibility that some real traders have their assistant to post here so you hypothesis may be totally wrong and cannot be confirmed by the method you are proposing?

Ron

 

[Bogan7]

Quote from ronblack:

Have you thought of the possibility that some real traders have their assistant to post here so you hypothesis may be totally wrong and cannot be confirmed by the method you are proposing?

Ron

Yes I believe all successful traders would do that!!! I also think they have there assistants read them the articles and cherry pick the best threads so there maybe a distortion bias there as well

 

[sim03]

Quote from Bogan7:

Is there a way to derive mathematically who is a real trader on this board?

One way came to me and i am not a quant but i thought what about dividing the number of posts by the time they have been members to give a rough posts per day figure. With the higher the number the higher the probablity the guy is a faker.

Most real traders are probably too busy to post here more than a few times a day at most (with exceptions I am sick and cant leave my flat today)

Maybe that can become part of our proflie next to the number of posts figure?

Cheers

Average posts per day is already a part of of our profile next to the number of posts figure. No need to divide anything to get a "rough" figure.

Here's a completely random example:

Profile For Bogan7 Search for all posts by this user.
Date Registered: 08-22-06
Status:
Total Posts: 523 (1.61 posts per day)
...

Your idea itself has merit overall, on average. The problem is that there are going to be too many exceptions either way: dreamers with low average daily posting rate and real traders with high rate.

 

[Bogan7]

Quote from sim03:

Average posts per day is already a part of of our profile next to the number of posts figure. No need to divide anything to get a "rough" figure.

Here's a completely random example:

Profile For Bogan7 Search for all posts by this user.
Date Registered: 08-22-06
Status:
Total Posts: 523 (1.61 posts per day)
...

Your idea itself has merit overall, on average. The problem is that there are going to be too many exceptions either way: dreamers with low average daily posting rate and real traders with high rate.

it is not suppossed to be exact just help shape probabilities in your favour and I disagree that we already have it what is currently there is to vauge.

I thought you Yanks wuld love it you already have grade point averages and batting averages the more the merrier I thought

 

[sim03]

Quote from Bogan7:

it is not suppossed to be exact just help shape probabilities in your favour and I disagree that we already have it what is currently there is to vauge.

So, you disagree that we already have it. OK. How exactly is what we have different than what you're proposing?

Your proposal:

Quote from Bogan7:

One way came to me and i am not a quant but i thought what about dividing the number of posts by the time they have been members to give a rough <font color=red>posts per day figure.
...
Maybe that can become part of our proflie next to the number of posts figure?</font color>

As opposed to what we have:

Profile For Bogan7 Search for all posts by this user.
Date Registered: 08-22-06
Status:
<font color=red>Total Posts: 523 (1.61 posts per day)</font color>

See the difference? Me neither.

And what exactly is "too vague" about "1.61 posts per day"?

 

[Bogan7]

Quote from sim03:



See the difference? Me neither.

And what exactly is "too vague" about "1.61 posts per day"?

Well instead of hacving to manually compute every time it would be nice if next to the updated post number we had say

FPA: (the Number) maybe even have a chart tab that would let people track a persons posting history over time? Just a few thoughts

 

[sim03]

Quote from Bogan7:

Well instead of hacving to manually compute every time it would be nice if next to the updated post number we had say

FPA: (the Number) maybe even have a chart tab that would let people track a persons posting history over time? Just a few thoughts

"Manually compute every time"? What is this, an Abbott and Costello routine? Maybe you should click on your own handle and take a look for yourself.

 

[Bogan7]

Quote from sim03:

"Manually compute every time"? What is this, an Abbott and Costello routine? Maybe you should click on your own handle and take a look for yourself.

Hey this is a very serious topic the Faker Point Average (FPA) should definately be included on everyones profile I dont mind being the first. Baron let thy work begin!!!

 

[NihabaAshi]

Hope you guys don't apply this type of research to your own trading.

With that said, here are some obvious flaws in your theory:

* Posters makes most of his/her posts before the market, after the market and weekends.

* Posters only trade part of the trading day and spends the remaining of the market day surfing trading forums.

* Posters with high post counts of quality posts versus poster with high post counts of arguing, attacking and non-market discussions.

* Members with low post counts that contain non trading discussions versus members with high post counts that contain trading discussions.

I can continue but I think you get my point.

Here's a better idea.

Take the time to read the members most recent posts to judge the merit of their market knowledge.

I think the most recent 25 posts should be able to give you a good indicator about any ET member for whatever it is that your looking for.

Therefore, if there's some gems/tips or whatever within those most recent 25 message posts that you think your already successfully applying in your own trading (if your trading) or you see other traders that you respect as traders agreeing with that trader...

You should have an easy answer about whom is real and whom is not real in comparison to your current research theory.

However, based upon your theory, a member with 150 posts in 3 years in which most of those posts are chit chat like material has more merits (most likely a real trader) in comparison to a ET members with 2000 posts in 3 years in which almost all the posts are market related and helping other traders...

Due to the fact the content of the message posts are being ignored.

My point, there are many ET members that fit the latter above (high post counts that's trading related and insightful about what actually is occurring in the markets).

Lets put it this way, lets encourage Baron to ban all the ET members with high post counts and keep all the ET members with low post counts.

After he does that...you will see the obvious problem with your theory.

However, if it still bothers you if someone is a fake or not...

Send him/her a copy of your profit/loss statement of today's market action (you do it first because your the one that's concerned about this issue) and then request him/her to do the same.

I mean, we don't want to see a fake trader complain about other ET members that are fake traders.

Mark