I hate to have another swr thread

Financial Independence/Retire Early -- Learn How!
User avatar
ElSupremo
Admin Board Member
Posts: 343
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 12:53 pm
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio

Post by ElSupremo »

Greetings all :)

raddr wrote:
Obviously this is not the case on the SWR research board and I won't be a part of it.

I hope everyone realizes that the SWR board is hocus's board. As long as that board conforms with the site rules he can run it any way he sees fit. Like raddr says anyone who has an issue with this can just abstain from participating there. The SWR board is not a reflection of my views or of NFB's. Whatever those views may be. In short it's an independent board just like the Badger Boys Board.(Which may not be long for this world if someone doesn't start posting soon. :roll:)

The rest of the boards here are NFB boards. As raddr puts it,
"Our fearless leader, ES, allows us to freely post thoughts that he clearly disagrees with."
On the FIRE board I'll make sure the spirit of the site is adhered to. On the rest of the NFB boards it will be the same. Unless something dastardly happens on an independent board I have no business interfering.
"The best things in life are FREE!"

www.nofeeboards.com
raddr
*** Veteran
Posts: 265
Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2002 3:25 am
Contact:

Post by raddr »

ElSupremo wrote: Greetings all :)

I hope everyone realizes that the SWR board is hocus's board. As long as that board conforms with the site rules he can run it any way he sees fit.


Hi ES,

Yes, I know you don't moderate the SWR board and hocus does. I won't participate on his board. 'Nuff said. :wink:
[KenM]
*** Veteran
Posts: 133
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2003 12:54 am

Post by [KenM] »

ataloss
I have admitted to not speaking or understanding hocusian discourse. Probably a deficiency on my part. I didn't understand him to be recommending reading the studies.

Then there is this astonishing indication that hocus has no idea of the methodology of the historical studies that he has been criticizing

I think that your post including the above quote summarises the position nicely. I'll have to remember which thread it's in. Although it's most unlikely I'll be "debating" with hocus again :D
KenM
Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and annoys the pig.
[KenM]
*** Veteran
Posts: 133
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2003 12:54 am

Post by [KenM] »

petey
I shall get around to reading intercst's report. I shall then make up my mind on how much of it I accept. My opinion on it has been biased back & forth and I will read it & decide for myself.

I'm far from being a 100% defender of the REHP report (I have reservations about both this and other reports based on historical data - I also have reservations about some of Bernstein's stuff) but a debate on the issues should be rational. The amusing irony of the situation is, (and jwr will hopefully correct me if I'm wrong :)) but jwr's recent work appears to use the same data and a similar methodology as intercst's report - so which bit of it is "invalid" :D
KenM
Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and annoys the pig.
User avatar
ataloss
**** Heavy Hitter
Posts: 559
Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2002 3:00 am

Post by ataloss »

but jwr's recent work appears to use the same data and a similar methodology as intercst's report - so which bit of it is "invalid"


LOL, although I think the data is fine. The real issue is with interpretation of the result and application to the future (although hocus disagrees with me on this)
Have fun.

Ataloss
User avatar
ataloss
**** Heavy Hitter
Posts: 559
Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2002 3:00 am

Post by ataloss »


Have fun.

Ataloss
peteyperson
**** Heavy Hitter
Posts: 525
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2002 6:46 am

Post by peteyperson »

<sigh> Of course he does.
ataloss wrote: (although hocus disagrees with me on this)
PainInTheAS
* Rookie
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue May 06, 2003 3:16 am

Post by PainInTheAS »

KenM wrote: The amusing irony of the situation is, (and jwr will hopefully correct me if I'm wrong :)) but jwr's recent work appears to use the same data and a similar methodology as intercst's report - so which bit of it is "invalid" :D


If I had to guess, the part that includes the data for which PE10 does not appear to correlate with SWR.

PITA
Post Reply