Why Is The Obvious Not So Obvious?

[Laissez Faire]

to be fair..and honest..not EVERYTHING

PDH
PDL
OP
TOD
MSL
MRL
ISL
IRL

Were I supposed to give the answers to these? I think I got the first 4. Need to think a bit on the last 4.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://hs.umt.edu/ghr/documents/152MontaigneEducationofChildren.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjE_JLRwsLwAhW0ThUIHaWkCo0QFjAAegQIBBAC&usg=AOvVaw0dlnqpTngZLTUxyAxit7uj

Slowly reading through this now. Thanks.

i have used this in the past and found it interesting !

Bollinger?

 

[odlareg]

Need to think a bit on the last 4

5). ..... ....... .....

GO

 

[Ed48]

Maybe I'm a bit thick but when I hear a lot of traders describe how they actually trade, most of it just goes over my head. So, maybe you can help me out?

If you strip it down to its bare bones, would you say your approach to trading essentially boils down to:

A) trying to identify tops and bottoms?
or
B) trying to identify turning points?
or
C) something else?

Thanks

Just to be clear, by "you" I wasn't referring to M4-1. This was a question for everyone else.

Shame I can't add a Poll, but you can just reply A, B or C if you like.

 

[M4-1]

Maybe I'm a bit thick but when I hear a lot of traders describe how they actually trade, most of it just goes over my head. So, maybe you can help me out?

If you strip it down to its bare bones, would you say your approach to trading essentially boils down to:

A) trying to identify tops and bottoms?
or
B) trying to identify turning points?
or
C) something else?

Thanks

you are not alone..thick i mean.. remember 1580

it is a combination..but..if you..

"can't see the forest for the tree"

then you are using RN Rope Theory

An expression used of someone who is too involved in the details of a problem to look at the situation as a whole: “

this might help !

 

[M4-1]

Were I supposed to give the answers to these? I think I got the first 4. Need to think a bit on the last 4.



Slowly reading through this now. Thanks.




Bollinger?

not bollinger..or any of that crap..it just happens to be mathematical..but you don't need it to be if you don't want..and..it depends on the platform you are using..some platforms offer more fancy drawing tools that others..but in most cases you have to just use your brain a little to see what you NEED to see !!

 

[Laissez Faire]

not bollinger..or any of that crap..it just happens to be mathematical..

Bollinger and every other indicator is mathematical, too. Could be a TSF. If not - maybe correlated instruments. Not sure if that has any value, though. So maybe not.

A common theme in the thread seems to be perception. Seeing the right things or seeing what you need to see.

Another common theme seems to be thinking for yourself and not trusting anyone else.

 

[M4-1]

Bollinger and every other indicator is mathematical, too. Could be a TSF. If not - maybe correlated instruments. Not sure if that has any value, though. So maybe not.

A common theme in the thread seems to be perception. Seeing the right things or seeing what you need to see.

Another common theme seems to be thinking for yourself and not trusting anyone else.

 

[Pelt]

General question... I can't really find it... but has anyone considered when reading became a thing that MOST people did? I.e., the year or two when it may have happened?

If this event can't be pinned down... would the analog for this be the adoption of religion into a society?

 

[Vindago]

writing started with numbers
tax collectors needed to keep accounts of the fields people owned so that the could pay taxes

 

[M4-1]

to be..or not to be..that is the question ?