Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
@Ted Hey, snowflake, I understand you think you're entitled to freebies/handouts from Big Internet, but get a job and pay for your own subscription. Stop stealing other people's newspapers from their front lawn.
@david moran: I've had this checked out several times, and have not committed any crime or violate any copyright law since I do not profit from my links. Regards, Ted
Here we go again with the negative comments. What am I to do as I cannot get away from them even just reading "Fund Discussions". You got an axe to grind take it elsewhere please. Keep it in the OT section.
@Art Do you see the author's name at the top of that story? I don't know what you do or did for a living, but suppose someone took the products of your labor and didn't pay you or your employer for them. How would you feel? I suggest you back off.
@Ted A lot of things are legal. Doesn't make them right.
@Art: You've got one hell of a nerve telling the author of a piece of financial writing that he doesn't have the right to comment on the misuse of his own original work.
@Ted says: "I've had this checked out several times, and have not committed any crime or violate any copyright law since I do not profit from my links."
Welcome, Comrade! Under our new socialist system you have every right to use someone else's work any way you want to.
Lewis Now your bad attitude is focused on me. As I told OJ I never read the article nor knew who wrote it. I scanned and saw the commentary and wasn't interested anymore. I am not backing off of anything. Your opinions are yours and I have mine.
@Art: Of course, understandable... why would you need to know the facts of what's happening before commenting?
Lewis has asked Ted a number of times to please stop presenting his work via an internet site that plays fast and loose with other people's intellectual property. Sort of like the Communist government of China, you know?
Ted feels that it's his right to do anything he damn well likes with Mr Braham's work.
And Lewis has a "bad attitude" about that. My goodness... I wonder why?
@Art My bad attitude towards you? You basically told me to shut up and stick to the OT threads without any knowledge whatsoever about the specific situation of someone misappropriating my and my publisher's work. I know you're "not backing off of anything" or apologizing for your own ignorance. That's the culture we now live in from the top down.
So now I am ignorant and you have decided that i am like the president. My problem was not with the article, who wrote it but with the prevailing tone of the posts. I never insulted you personally as you did with me. Adios.
Get off this intellectual property BS. In the over 50,000 links here at MFO and FundAlarm you are the only one to ever complain.
And then Ted posted a link to images of pirates to mock my concerns. Then I responded in kind with some sass back. Yet somehow you decided to insert yourself without any knowledge of the situation and attack me for having a "axe to grind" and telling me to go elsewhere. Yet you said absolutely nothing to Ted for provoking this whole exchange by first posting pirated material of my work and then insulting me for merely noting that it was pirated and providing the true link to the story. No, nothing you have to say about Ted. That's what I call a hypocritical double standard if ever I saw one. And yet it is an all-too familiar double standard.
Note, I am not defending what appears to be cetusnews' theft of IP, or anyone facilitating that theft by publishing links. I am saying only that using "tricks" like Google searches do not constitute theft if they are sanctioned by the property owner. In general, I agree with Lewis about respecting property rights.
This is a long-winded way of saying that the column in question may be accessible via a Google search.
FWIW, I agree with some of what Lewis wrote in the column, and disagree with other parts. Nothing of major consequence, though I do suggest that issue selection likely has a larger impact in a junk bond fund than in an investment grade bond fund.
IG grade bonds rarely blow up. So ISTM building an IG portfolio is more a matter of making parameter value choice (mix of credit ratings, durations, sectors, etc.) than worrying about issue selection. Junk bonds are less fungible.
First of all let me thank Lewis for writing the article since I was able to read it through Ted's posting a link to it.
I compared the junk bond fund LBNDX that I currently own against the author's choice of DSIAX. At times, LBNDX edges out DSIAX and at other time periods DSIAX edges out LBNDX. To me, they are both good funds and I plan on keeping LBNDX. However, from past articles that Lewis has written I have gained some insight that I would not otherwise have. Most of these article links were posted by Ted.
I understand how Lewis might feel about his article being posted on the board for many of us to read without paying for its reading through subscription based media. However, it is available through a Google search which Ted posted. I don't fault Lewis for his feelings and I don't fault Ted for posting the Google link to the article. Fellows ... it's the system, in general, that's at fault. If the system would not allow Ted the ability to post the article then it would not be here. Some may feel otherwise and that is ok by me.
Lewis, I am sorry you feel short changed and I think I understand how you feel. But, in my many years on the board there has been a "spirit of goodwill" abounding among us Fund Alarm and MFO members of helping each other with our investing endeavors. Please know both you and Ted have helped me and I thank you both. Also, I hold both of you in high regard and, to me, both of you stand in "good light." I'm thinking if this bickering continues it has a good chance of destroying the board as I trend to avoid most post I feel might contain it (bickering). My reading of this post was an exception; and, I felt it important to express my feelings.
Comments
P.S. Nothing illegal was done since MFO or myself profited from the link. Get off this intellectual property BS. In the over 50,000 links here at MFO and FundAlarm you are the only one to ever complain.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.google.com/search?q=pirate&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&fir=exYjYsanUvbNJM%3A%2CXStyrt0GGOrraM%2C_&usg=__eBQiWr5nC3qRuVuRAfnhj8jj55k=&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjPu--0lOXbAhVEITQIHfMEDC4Q_h0IxwEwDg#imgrc=exYjYsanUvbNJM:
Regards,
Ted
Here we go again with the negative comments. What am I to do as I cannot get away from them even just reading "Fund Discussions". You got an axe to grind take it elsewhere please. Keep it in the OT section.
@Ted A lot of things are legal. Doesn't make them right.
Welcome, Comrade! Under our new socialist system you have every right to use someone else's work any way you want to.
Lewis has asked Ted a number of times to please stop presenting his work via an internet site that plays fast and loose with other people's intellectual property. Sort of like the Communist government of China, you know?
Ted feels that it's his right to do anything he damn well likes with Mr Braham's work.
And Lewis has a "bad attitude" about that. My goodness... I wonder why?
http://nymag.com/selectall/2017/10/google-search-hack-to-get-around-paywall-no-longer-works.html
Note, I am not defending what appears to be cetusnews' theft of IP, or anyone facilitating that theft by publishing links. I am saying only that using "tricks" like Google searches do not constitute theft if they are sanctioned by the property owner. In general, I agree with Lewis about respecting property rights.
This is a long-winded way of saying that the column in question may be accessible via a Google search.
FWIW, I agree with some of what Lewis wrote in the column, and disagree with other parts. Nothing of major consequence, though I do suggest that issue selection likely has a larger impact in a junk bond fund than in an investment grade bond fund.
IG grade bonds rarely blow up. So ISTM building an IG portfolio is more a matter of making parameter value choice (mix of credit ratings, durations, sectors, etc.) than worrying about issue selection. Junk bonds are less fungible.
I compared the junk bond fund LBNDX that I currently own against the author's choice of DSIAX. At times, LBNDX edges out DSIAX and at other time periods DSIAX edges out LBNDX. To me, they are both good funds and I plan on keeping LBNDX. However, from past articles that Lewis has written I have gained some insight that I would not otherwise have. Most of these article links were posted by Ted.
I understand how Lewis might feel about his article being posted on the board for many of us to read without paying for its reading through subscription based media. However, it is available through a Google search which Ted posted. I don't fault Lewis for his feelings and I don't fault Ted for posting the Google link to the article. Fellows ... it's the system, in general, that's at fault. If the system would not allow Ted the ability to post the article then it would not be here. Some may feel otherwise and that is ok by me.
Lewis, I am sorry you feel short changed and I think I understand how you feel. But, in my many years on the board there has been a "spirit of goodwill" abounding among us Fund Alarm and MFO members of helping each other with our investing endeavors. Please know both you and Ted have helped me and I thank you both. Also, I hold both of you in high regard and, to me, both of you stand in "good light." I'm thinking if this bickering continues it has a good chance of destroying the board as I trend to avoid most post I feel might contain it (bickering). My reading of this post was an exception; and, I felt it important to express my feelings.
Peace be with you both and others as well.
Old_Skeet