You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
The Proposed Iranian Oil Bourse
- Thread starter abiasi
- Start date
Quote from 2cents:
thats just more words jimmy, except the only claim i made since page 8 of this thread, and i stand by it, is that you are a DISINGENUOUS INTELLECTUAL FRAUD and it won't take a very careful reader to crosscheck that you are simply attempting here in this long desperate post to reverse my questions about your farty assertions (and in the process, fabricate claims i haven't made), questions that you haven't even begun to answer, simply because you can't, without contradicting yourself... and that's simply too much for your pride...
how warped and pathetic of you to attempt to conceal a grudging acknowledgement such as the below, after being so pompously assertive, within a 1,000 words of blather really??
it IS actually out of consideration for the other readers that i am exposing your devious manners jimmy... not surprised that you shouldn't be too happy about that matey :-;
now re the initial subject matter, i have also offered some alternative opinions if you care to read... feel free to re-phrase them as well if you must, the more you do it, the more you discredit yourself...
Lets keep this discussion civil and on topic. There is no need to take a personal shot at another member of elite trader using inflamatory words like warped, pathetic, etc. If you disagree with someone's posts.......great argue the counter-point, discuss what you think is wrong with it, etc, but lets not let things digress to point where were name calling and going after the poster instead of the point of discussion.
Thanks.
i hear you Avalanche, and as you will perhaps have noted - you may not have since your intervention here focusses on form and the thread is rather long now - i have provided substantial on-topic counterarguments and substantiated on-topic opinions all along this thread, which you may or may not agree with, but then that's your right as a person,
but what are we to do with posters who make such claims:
then faced with hard data on page 8, simply asserts that the US Public Debt Office figures are fraudulent, cooked! Are we accusing the US Public Debt Office of fraud!!! is it more OK than ad hominem characterizations of the poster himself being a proven intellectual fraud?
and brushes off any solid data-based argument against his many times repeated point:
then, piqued, (but hey, if you look back, he is the one who grandiosely denounces the "weakness of the counterarguments presented by you and other posters" )... goes on at length about how a historical occurence of hyperinflation (weimar) is a relevant point of comparison to today's situation on the basis that there is a causative link between a high debt/gdp ratio and hyperinflation and "we have seen the beginnings of hyperinflation", which i argue it clearly isn't, relevant...
also resorts to outright lies, fabrication of claims, and other warped-type reformulations etc as a dialectic tactic:
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=1119420#post1119420
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=1120122#post1120122
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=1119638#post1119638
my point here is that the poster will resort to absolutely ANYTHING to wiggle out of the hole he has made for himself pretending he has done ample / serious research when he simply hasn't - and his last post couldn't better show how little he understands about the subject - and will not hesitate misleading the less-informed reader into accepting any sort of outright propaganda that serves his purposes / conforms to his OPINIONS.
with all due respect for you and the mods in general and the vital function(s) you guys perform on this board, on substance now, is this the sort of attitudes you would want to encourage on this board, Avalanche?
but what are we to do with posters who make such claims:
Quote from jimrockford:
I think your presumption that I believe in the article, even though I have repeatedly expressed my agnosticism and open mind on the question, demonstrates that you have a lack of comprehension, and a lack of interest, and a lack of respect for the opinions of others. You were wrong to take my discussion of the weaknesses in your arguments as an expression of my agreement with the article you were critiquing.
I think you are way out of line to question my intellectual honesty or to call me lazy, based on anything in this thread. Your presumption that I have done no research is quite incorrect and irrational. I can only presume that your warped perceptions result from your inattention and lack of comprehension.
then faced with hard data on page 8, simply asserts that the US Public Debt Office figures are fraudulent, cooked! Are we accusing the US Public Debt Office of fraud!!! is it more OK than ad hominem characterizations of the poster himself being a proven intellectual fraud?
Quote from jimrockford:
the numbers you are using are cooked and fraudulent. If we overlook this flaw in your argument, then there is another by your comparison to France as an example that high public debt is benign. They ain't doing so well. They are desperate, jobless, hopeless, and violently rioting.
and brushes off any solid data-based argument against his many times repeated point:
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=62735&perpage=6&pagenumber=9Quote from 2cents:
re public debt / gdp ratio, YOU brought that up as an important factor... France: good points, however they're not exactly bankrupt nor on the verge of hyperinflation are they? btw, their SS system has gone bankrupt so many times they can't even remember... didn't seem to be much of an issue... how about Germany, Japan etc... there is a pretty long list mate...
thats because it contains 'pointers' to the information, i never said nor intended to give you the information on a silver plate... this info is and has been available all along and is a few mouseclicks away if you'd ever done ANY proper research of your own... what's to learn if we spoon-feed you all the time??
but my point is more that YOU SIMPLY HAVE BEEN TOO INTELLECTUALLY LAZY to do your own research, and have preferred to go by the grand declarations of some unproven bozo who happens to 'think' like you...
then, piqued, (but hey, if you look back, he is the one who grandiosely denounces the "weakness of the counterarguments presented by you and other posters" )... goes on at length about how a historical occurence of hyperinflation (weimar) is a relevant point of comparison to today's situation on the basis that there is a causative link between a high debt/gdp ratio and hyperinflation and "we have seen the beginnings of hyperinflation", which i argue it clearly isn't, relevant...
also resorts to outright lies, fabrication of claims, and other warped-type reformulations etc as a dialectic tactic:
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=1119420#post1119420
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=1120122#post1120122
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=1119638#post1119638
my point here is that the poster will resort to absolutely ANYTHING to wiggle out of the hole he has made for himself pretending he has done ample / serious research when he simply hasn't - and his last post couldn't better show how little he understands about the subject - and will not hesitate misleading the less-informed reader into accepting any sort of outright propaganda that serves his purposes / conforms to his OPINIONS.
with all due respect for you and the mods in general and the vital function(s) you guys perform on this board, on substance now, is this the sort of attitudes you would want to encourage on this board, Avalanche?
The latest batch of accusations made against me, by 2cents in this thread, are lies and are filled with false information. He inaccurately described my statements, and he attributed to me many statements which I did not make at all. He falsely accused me of laziness, lies, fraud, fabricated claims, and failure to do research. He accused me of "vehemential denegations", by which I think he meant vehement denigrations, which is also a false accusation. He falsely accused me of failing to provide supporting evidence for certain of my statements, when in fact, I did provide support for those particular statements. I used certain words about the "beginnings of hyperinflation", which were misunderstood, so I later clarified them, but he is spreading confusion by continuing to quote my original misunderstood words, while ignoring my subsequent clarification.
This type of off-topic personal attack has continued and intensified through most of the thread. It has increasingly interfered with my ability to participate in the thread, because it makes me spend so much time responding to an endless campaign of false accusations, and I think it has intimidated others and driven them away from the discussion. I suggest that people who want to see a serious adult discussion of the thread topic, rather than a discussion attacking the people involved in the discussion, should complain to the moderator, Avalanche. If you go to the latest posting by 2cents, and click on the complain button toward the bottom of his post, a window will open, allowing you to send a brief message to the moderator, where you can complain that 2cents continues to interfere with the discussion, and to disobey the public warning he already received from Avalanche just yesterday in this thread.
This type of off-topic personal attack has continued and intensified through most of the thread. It has increasingly interfered with my ability to participate in the thread, because it makes me spend so much time responding to an endless campaign of false accusations, and I think it has intimidated others and driven them away from the discussion. I suggest that people who want to see a serious adult discussion of the thread topic, rather than a discussion attacking the people involved in the discussion, should complain to the moderator, Avalanche. If you go to the latest posting by 2cents, and click on the complain button toward the bottom of his post, a window will open, allowing you to send a brief message to the moderator, where you can complain that 2cents continues to interfere with the discussion, and to disobey the public warning he already received from Avalanche just yesterday in this thread.
Quote from jimrockford:
Are you familiar with the Latin term ad hominem? Do you know what that term means? Here is a link for you, which I hope might help improve the quality of your participation on ET:
http://www.britannica.com/ebc/article-9364182?query=ad hominem&ct=.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
formal and informal fallacy
In philosophy, reasoning that fails to establish its conclusion because of deficiencies in form or wording.
Formal fallacies are types of deductive argument that instantiate an invalid inference pattern (see deduction; validity); an example is âaffirming the consequent: If A then B; B; therefore, A.â Informal fallacies are types of inductive argument the premises of which fail to establish the conclusion because of their content. There are many kinds of informal fallacy; examples include argumentum ad hominem (âargument against the manâ), which consists of attacking the arguer instead of his argument; the fallacy of false cause, which consists of arguing from the premise that one event precedes another to the conclusion that the first event is the cause of the second; the fallacy of composition, which consists of arguing from the premise that a part of a thing has a certain property to the conclusion that the thing itself has that property; and the fallacy of equivocation, which consists of arguing from a premise in which a term is used in one sense to a conclusion in which the term is used in another sense.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
click on his name, you´ll be taken to a menu, then click on add user to my ignore list. It works wonders.Quote from jimrockford:
The latest batch of accusations made against me, by 2cents in this thread, are lies and are filled with false information. He inaccurately described my statements, and he attributed to me many statements which I did not make at all. He falsely accused me of laziness, lies, fraud, fabricated claims, and failure to do research. He accused me of "vehemential denegations", by which I think he meant vehement denigrations, which is also a false accusation. He falsely accused me of failing to provide supporting evidence for certain of my statements, when in fact, I did provide support for those particular statements. I used certain words about the "beginnings of hyperinflation", which were misunderstood, so I later clarified them, but he is spreading confusion by continuing to quote my original misunderstood words, while ignoring my subsequent clarification.
This type of off-topic personal attack has continued and intensified through most of the thread. It has increasingly interfered with my ability to participate in the thread, because it makes me spend so much time responding to an endless campaign of false accusations, and I think it has intimidated others and driven them away from the discussion. I suggest that people who want to see a serious adult discussion of the thread topic, rather than a discussion attacking the people involved in the discussion, should complain to the moderator, Avalanche. If you go to the latest posting by 2cents, and click on the complain button toward the bottom of his post, a window will open, allowing you to send a brief message to the moderator, where you can complain that 2cents continues to interfere with the discussion, and to disobey the public warning he already received from Avalanche just yesterday in this thread.
Quote from eusdaiki:
click on his name, you´ll be taken to a menu, then click on add user to my ignore list. It works wonders.
Thanks for the suggestion, but it doesn't solve my problem. My problem is not that I must read what he says. My problem is that he makes false statements about me to the rest of the board, which interfere with my ability to communicate with the rest of the board. My failure to read and to deny his accusations, and my silence upon them, would be misinterpreted as admission they are true. The ignore feature won't solve this problem.
Avalanche, just an opinion of course, but:Quote from 2cents:
why not start the thread with a more worthy article / personal contribution then? This is Economics, not Chit Chat...
. the OP's article is a simplistic piece of political propaganda
. the ensuing discussion is at the core one of fact vs opinion
. serious econometric data from the US Public Debt Bureau is dubbed "fraudulent, cooked" by some random poster, serious econometric-type assessments from the CEPR are similarly ignored, to the benefit of some dialectical cum historical materialism type brainwash
What is it achieving for ET that this thread should still be sitting in the Economics section really? Isn't Chit Chat MADE for that?