Quote from Thunderdog:
Grob,
Just curious. Since you regularly get together with like-minded people and create a fair amount of educational material, why do you not have a web site of your own? If you did have one, then you would be able to dispense your views in a totally unfettered manner. Perhaps you should give it some thought.
Although I do not personally follow your methods, it appears that there are many here who do, as evidenced by the lengthy threads discussing your strategies. However, if I may be so bold, I would suggest that you try to curb your occasional messianic mien and focus that energy on clarity and brevity.
There are many web sites that contain my stuff.
Several universities archive it as well.
I spend time thinking. I do think about how to improve transference.
The last transcription to hit the deck last night came in about 11:30MST. The illustrations will be added today and the copy will be forwarded (Thursday is forwarding day) to the first edit.
I do not transcribe; I do not ilustrate; I do not edit.
I am unfamiliar with messianic mien...would you be so kind to fully articulate your view if you have the patience and interest. If not I understand.
Strunk and White are very familiar to me. I like three words from their domain: clear, concise, and crisp.
Thank you for your comments. I always appreciate them.
Now I will return to my modus.
Three web sites were recently registered. They and the web designers are well behind schedule. There are reasons.
Practically speaking, there are deliberations going on with regard to two things: making a full range of materials available and making it possible for anyone to participate.
Our present site is being wrecked occasionally by people who need to wreck things. It is very tough on the team who is keeping it going.
You can imagine what it would be like if our sites invaded by the destructive sort of people who pervade ET. This is a bandwidth issue in many ways.
All of these considerations have answers which just require time and money to get straight. That is being done.
Essentially, transference is the mission.
Attendant to this are many other facets of consideration.
These considerations are not too important to those who will make use of stuff. Considerations are more QA concerns of us as providers.
We discovered very quickly that camtasias as stand alones were difficult to use. This is because of their density of information, etc... A decision was made to transcribe them and illustrate the transcription. The effect of this was that the user could annotate the transcription and illustrations EACH time the camtasia was played by the person. Note that there is a general concensus that repeated viwing is necessary.
That is the back end. Now the front end. It is better to make camtasias with learning participants, it turns out. It is also better, during discussions of questions that group members bring to the table, to camtasia the coverage of the solutions to these questions. Handouts always accompany both of these activities. these handouts are the illustrations of the camtasia and because of this we always use scanning and support laptops to prep the main laptop used for the large screen being viewed by all participants.
The general result is minutes of camtasia, pages of transcripts and pages of ilustrations. The ratio is: 10 minutes:five pages of transcript; five pages of illustrations. So a meeting is 120 minutes of camtasia and a handout of 120 pages. We do a model part every two weeks.
What transference adds up to is unknown, largely, to ET and also to those participating in this thread.
My professional degree was earned during the inception of a grad program at RPI. Last year 62% of students had it as one of their dual majors in its current undergrad level formulation. Were I to name the discipline it would be "transference".
People are viewing me doing transference and it is not a good thing as viewed by more than 4 out of 5. 4 out of 5 think what I suggest is bullshit and additional people think how I do it is lousy and I better give some thought to it all.
So now people are participating in getting everything together in a multimedia collection that will provide for transference.
We have a model. It is accessable anywhere. You pass through into it from the "outside" at any point in the outer surface. While inside, you "get". Next, we query you and suggest pathways or send you down a laundry chute to where what you are missing and not knowing what you are missing stuff is located. There is an esculator back to where you were.
Some people are going to want to wreck everything because that is their objective. Others will make contributions.
For you, this deals with messianic mein, clarity and brevity. Trader666 fucks away the time with evasiveness and obsfication etc...... Others deal with learning to make money...........
I deal with transference as a comprehensive process. The word process is not going to be understood by anyone who is an observer. It may be understood by a participant after a while. It is certainly understood by those who are in a mode to acquire knowledge, skills and experience.
So I am running a delivery system that is about 47 years old. there are those who use the delivery system as a means of acquisition of knowledge, skills and experience.
I am suspicious that I am going to find out from you that you think I do delivery as done behind a curtain for a person in red shoes on a yellow brick road. You are not a person who is going to accept knowledge, skills or experience in any way except how you want it. your "brevity and clarity" are associated with learning in an arena that is not a "process" in the manner that I construe is required as the arena for learning to occur.
I spent 10 formal years examining this "process" arena. My general result is a 1.23 sigma shift in aptitude on a 6 sigma Gaussian fitted data curve from raw scores. A 100% sample was used in the context of a reference sample of over 2 million per trial, p<.05 in all runs.
I flatly disagree with the learning delivery systems you and others expect to be what is the required. I expect that what I do to get transference will be rejected by those in your class of observers. Participants in acquisition of knwledge, skills and experience to make money in markets have to go through a self designed personal process of acquisition. The best that I can do in this effort on their part is to have a model, give access to the model from specifically where they are located in the space; support the process path(s) they chose with sub processes that are idiot proofed and have no downside consquences; and be available to conduct activities by going to where they are and fowarding them to where I am.
Part of this is doing drills. In this thread I made several referenes and attached draft copy. The handout from which the stuff came is entitled "Building Minds for Building Wealth". BM4BW is a good description of process learning. The tradition of clarity, crispness and conciseness certainly saves paper and reading time. On the other hand what are the descriptors for building the mind to be able to make money.
A mechanical by product of what I speak of does 11.1% in 6.6 days on average for an initial period of 6 months. What was the "process". It was getting 4 emails a day (fourth hand) for a period of time. One before he market opened. One at synch. One 30 to 40 minutes later and a last one around 10:30 or 11:00. I was averaging 5 citations a year at the time for "insider" trading by the SEC. I am typing a message to people here. Read the message I am typing.
