Is Jack Hershey abusing ET?

Quote from jack hershey:

mission control...we have a turd in the punch bowl..

ciao
salmon time
More...
Are you lost in space, yet?
I haven't put anything in the punchbowl, just want
to know what you expect, so that you won't be disappointed. Guess you expressed it.
 
I don't utilize Jack's methods, but I have learned so much from reading what he has to offer and other Sincere contributors to his forum.

I have to say the same for Spyder too. Nowhere do you see these men bashing for the sake of bashing. Nowhere do you see them even subtly trying to incite some frivolous public opinion on any of these boards. Just good ole honest to goodness help.

I pretty much come in here to see what they have added to their journals first and then peruse the rest of the garbage if I have the time which I usually don't since the contributions they and others have made keep me buys for hours.

Thanks to Spyder and Jack and all the people I don't know by name for giving me enough ammunition in my otherwise empty trading arsenal to survive and continue to do what I love to do.
 
Quote from Tums:

banning someone from free speech? that's so un-American.

put him on "Ignore".

you don't need the moderator's permission to use the ignore button.
More...
I agree with that but Ignoring him won't change the fact that the thread has derailed and wont stop me seeing the many meta-discussions about Hershey. Of course I can skip his posts, and I do of course, but it is the effect on the discussion I have problems with.

I don't think it is against free speech to prevent disruption of discussions by rascalling the same pointless stuff all the time. This happens in any real-world forum as well. If not, no discussions would be possible, which is where ET is heading.

If he can not be banned than have him adhere to some general rules at least.

If you know of a better solution than please let me know; because it is a problem, for me and increasingly so for ET as well.

Ursa..
 
Quote from jack hershey:

He's still looking. He's sqinting too.

ursa has a good point about the serious contribuants (potential is what he means), though.

They are are getting scared away.
More...
So, what are you going to about that?

Ursa..
 
He may or may not be everything everyone says, one thing that I think we can all agree on is that his writing style is unique! Where do you learn to write like that? Is english a second language? I am sincerely interested as I have never come across anyone who writes like that and would like to know what the grammatical influences are (Native America possibly?)

There was a show on the beeb years back called "Yes, Minister" with this civil servant called Sir Humphrey who was very adept at spouting things in Whitehall speak. Jack Hershey could give civil servants like him lessons in confounding verbiage, it really is quite impressive.

Examples of civil service speak:

Sir Humphrey: "It's clear that the Committee has agreed that your new policy is really an excellent plan. But in view of the doubts being expressed, may I propose that I recall that after careful consideration, the considered view of the Committee was that, while they considered that the proposal met with broad approval in principle, that some of the principles were sufficiently fundamental in principle, and some of the considerations so complex and finely balanced in practice that in principle it was proposed that the sensible and prudent practice would be to submit the proposal for more detailed consideration, laying stress on the essential continuity of the new proposal with existing principles, the principal of the principal arguments which the proposal proposes and propounds for their approval. In principle."



Sir Humphrey: "With Trident we could obliterate the whole of Eastern Europe."
Jim Hacker: "I don't want to obliterate the whole of Eastern Europe."
Sir Humphrey: "It's a deterrent."
Jim Hacker: "It's a bluff. I probably wouldn't use it."
Sir Humphrey: "Yes, but they don't know that you probably wouldn't."
Jim Hacker: "They probably do."
Sir Humphrey: "Yes, they probably know that you probably wouldn't. But they can't certainly know."
Jim Hacker: "They probably certainly know that I probably wouldn't."
Sir Humphrey: "Yes, but even though they probably certainly know that you probably wouldn't, they don't certainly know that, although you probably wouldn't, there is no probability that you certainly would."

Had to add this, its a classic:
Sir Humphrey: "Bernard, what is the purpose of our defence policy?"
Bernard Woolley: "To defend Britain."
Sir Humphrey: "No, Bernard. It is to make people believe Britain is defended."
Bernard Woolley: "The Russians?"
Sir Humphrey: "Not the Russians, the British! The Russians know it is not."
 
Jack is too dang cool, there I said it. He has 40 years head start on me and is willing to share, sort of. That makes him sort of a good guy in my book. Jack is part of the reason that ET is so addicting. I wonder if they have a patch, or rehab or something for this?
 
Quote from MajorUrsa:

So, what are you going to about that?

Ursa..
More...


There are a lot of considerations.

This year, 2007, we are gong to take the trading up to expert levels for both the PVT and SCT.

I have some commitments to a a single platform rolling for trading PVT and SCT.

And we are completing the mechanical versions of PVT and SCT on the expert level.

There are four books in the works as well as the web sites for three different untions: .com, .net and .org.


Besides that there is the fifth book on the mind and trading.

This is several months work it turns out.

Your situation, condition and circumstance is an example that fits into many places. After I read the 515 pages (ET pages) I will know more.

There isn't much on serious discussions of trading anywhere as yet. I do see the treminology of the pool extraction paradigm coming into existance and I do see the slow fade og the long held traditions of the conventiional orthodoxy that is fading from the primary position it was entrenched in in the past.


Your fear that people who are potentially serious participants in good threads but are being scared off by me is not too interesting.

The fear, anxiety and anger of those who perform at the conventional levels is an area of consequences that people bring on themselves that is interesting.


The expectation that you have that a system will be set up for your convenience was a neat thing to unpuzzle this afternoon. having it work for both sets of people was a neat thing. People like you in need and people like me who are the causal agents of your needs.


You want to hear from a class of people who are operating in some realm or realms. The performance of the financial industry is so poor compared to what is offered by the markets and the top players who get paid for their performance levels.

The railroad industry lost out to the airline industry at some point. At some point the conventiional stuff is going to take a back seat to those who are espousing making money.

Who knows why those you feel are not particiapting to speak about convention are so reluctant as you have determined.

All those obvious solutions you need are there as well. I may only seem to be so pervasive and actually not be for one.

I know you do see that I am a person who is around and about and what I say is derived from knowledge, skills and experience and nothing else.

It is really tough to get to a place of great knowledge and experience about a traditional established pervasive way of thinking, and have some well reasoned elephants in the room that are not being looked at or acknowledged.

You aren't going to look as you infer, etc.. But as you keep going your ways, you get to wonder why other serious contributors do not step up to the line.

Have you participated in "invitation only" groups for a long time at this point?

I'll sample your contributions and see how they helped others so far.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top