Quote from Spydertrader:
I made it crystal clear as to what you needed to understand. Now, you either have a high intellect, or you do not. Since we have (on several occasions) watched as you pointed out examples of your esteemed brain power, what conclusion should one draw from the fact that you appear now unable to focus on the quoted text provided in my post? Here it is again ...
Now, knock off the bullshit.
You've been told numerous times about the errors you make. Rather than accept the input, you launch directly into a 500 word response attacking the material and the professor. Your behavior exemplifies an individual who needs to be right. Fine. You are right. Happy now?
What don't you understand? That other people don't blame the material? That Mak posted several years ago, what one needed to do? That you often fail to recall key components articulated numerous times only to then later blame me for posting innocuous responses? That many people have continually requested you post charts with your questions, yet you fail to do so?
Come on now. Enough of the charade.
- Spydertrader
It's very, very easy to make a bunch of ungrounded (lacking evidence) statements. Pretend all you want that this is a charade. It's not to me and others. It's also very easy to take things a person sayes out of context. You've done a stellar job of this.
You keep saying that I attack the material and the professor. Well, if you want to call what I do attacking, I guess we don't agree on the meaning of the word.
When I find contradiction and offer up proof, is that attacking?
When I point out broken promises, is that attacking?
When I carefully analyze what has been stated as fact and find areas that are not clear, is that attacking?
I don't know specifically what you are referring to (because you almost never are specific) when you point out that I claim to have great intellect. I believe I have above average intellect. I also pointed out at some time that you perceived that to be the case also. And, most importantly, somewhere in the past weeks I pointed out that having a high degree of intellect was of no use in trading, possibly even a hindrance.
If you have a problem with me personally, it seems the rational thing to do is take the matter up directly with me. You have my phone number and my email address. You seem absolutely convinced that I'm doing this to derail this thread and not much I say will change that I suppose.
I am strong willed, and come off a bit high and might at times. For that I apologize to all. Yet, Spyder, you can't see that you come off the very same way, more often than you might ever imagine.
I gave up trying to convince you that much better, productive ways exist to teach this group. I came back, after a few days away, for a fresh start. I quietly posted three questions. And the flurry that ensued DID NOT START WITH ME!
If a student keeps asking what appears to be the same questions over and over, and all the teacher can do is say it's the students problem (or something akin to that), I question whether a teacher even exists in the equation. Information dispensor yes. Teacher, no.