not so standard re*p fare...

Financial Independence/Retire Early -- Learn How!
Post Reply
wanderer
*** Veteran
Posts: 363
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2002 9:33 am
Location: anytown, usa

not so standard re*p fare...

Post by wanderer »

http://boards.fool.com/Message.asp?mid= ... e#18344360

this thread is revelatory of the triad's (g, i, t) basic "discussion blocking methodology." old news, i know.

what was not so old hat were some posts by jammerh, euro(! - the 'American Century" comment was something i coulda written;-)), and gwm(!!).

essentially, i gathered that they found ykw's posts to be significantly problematic in the common sense/utility for FIREs department. but maybe i misinterpret...:wink:

db - raising your voice on the increasing WR issue helped that board, imo.

w
regards,

wanderer

The field has eyes / the wood has ears / I will see / be silent and hear
wanderer
*** Veteran
Posts: 363
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2002 9:33 am
Location: anytown, usa

Post by wanderer »

gwm -

So that my position is clear, I believe that Intercst's SWR study is simple, concise, and is as right as the data permits.

I have never agreed with Hocus that there is more to be seen. Intercst's data more than exhausts worst case historical returns to my satisfaction.

I believe that the absence of a study doesnt mean that something doesnt exist. It does, however, mean that you dont have to believe me if I tell you that something exists.

Certainly, equities have the most data available for obvious reasons. The presence of that data doesnt mean it's returns are unbeatable, it just means it's a highly documented investment strategy, IMHO.

I agree with Intercst's SWR study to the extent that we are talking about about the survivability of a portfolio if future events are no worse than the past. Of course, I disagree that equities are a superior investment class, generally speaking.

I only made this post because I didnt want Hocus to wrongly interpret my comments as his ideas gaining traction.

and i had such high hopes.:wink:

w
Last edited by wanderer on Sat Dec 28, 2002 3:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
regards,

wanderer

The field has eyes / the wood has ears / I will see / be silent and hear
hocus
Moderator
Posts: 435
Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2002 12:56 am

Post by hocus »

What was not so old hat were some posts by jammerh, euro(! - the 'American Century" comment was something i coulda written;-)), and gwm(!!).

wanderer:

You are right to note that the posts referred to above were significant. The board is slowly working its way around to doing something about its problem.

The most positive sign of all was the poll taken Monday afternoon in which 61 board members endorsed the view that "this board has gone to hell" because of its focus on off-topic posts and personal attacks. Intercst is making a mistake in denying the desires of this segment of the board community.

The task now is getting this Group of 61 to speak up more in the public debate. As a rule, the group that favors on-topic debates hates discussions that veer too far from early retirement. When they see a thread turning personal, they just switch to another thread or leave the board altogether for a time. I think this is because they are sensible people, which in most parts of the universe is not considered such a bad thing.

What fools people is that the group that dominates the posting favors intercst. This sometimes makes it appear that most of the board community does. But the non-vocal group has sent lots of signals that it wants the board to spend more time dealing with its stated mission. If intercst continues to ignore this group, I think they will be more inclined to speak up as time goes on.

There really are lots of people on that board with a genuine interest in early retirement, we just need to find a way to insure that their views are taken into account when Motley Fool is deciding how to go about enforcing its posting rules.
Post Reply