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.
Though I do not get here often....moreso now over the holidays....I have not seen Scott or John Chisum. Are they not here anymore? I miss their posts greatly. God bless the Pudd
I wondered about them myself too. Sometimes people just move on ... to never be heard from again. I hope this is not the case with these two @Scott and @JohnChisum. Perhaps they will make a post soon.
In checking their log and last visit detail Scott's last visit was 1/3/16 and John's was sometime back in December 2015.
In July, @JohnChisum said this on the board: 'I've decided to spend more time elsewhere. Less curmudgeons. I will check in from time to time but weeding through the "links" will be difficult.'
Don't forget that you asked have the option of sending a private message to any other member of the board. If you'd like to say "hi" to John and Scott, I'm sure they'd welcome the contact.
speaking of weeding through "links", is there a way to set up a category that shows all posts *not* started by ted except for posts started by ted that have one or more responses?
@linter: Thanks for the suggestion. But fail to see the point of doing that. Sounds a bit unfair - not to mention unnecessary. (However, if they want to start a section with all posts not started by me it's OK & would probably be more helpful). ---
Almost forgot to add: It's nice to see Scott's still around and I do miss John's unique commentaries from Down Under a lot.
speaking of weeding through "links", is there a way to set up a category that shows all posts *not* started by ted except for posts started by ted that have one or more responses?
On the left side of the page there is an option for "Discussions +". This option omits all posts without any responses. But this option does not exclude only Ted offers. It is an equal opportunity filter.
@linter If there are too many weeds for your taste, perhaps you could consider planting some flowers in their place. You know, contribute some posts with material that would be useful, detailed, enlightening, informative (unlike your bile). In the meantime, please, do let us know if there is anything that we can do for you. Anything at all.
Thanks for the input Anna. I assumed linter was aware of the Discussion+ category so I did not mention it earlier. Alas! We all come here for different things and have different points of view on how the board should operate!
I for one enjoy spirited debate (even occasional mud slinging) on issues financial. It helps in life to have a thick skin, as well as a sense of humor, and I believe the discussions here often foster both.
But when heated discussions erupt on politics and social or constitutional matters I usually get frustrated quickly and pull away. I'd think there's other sites folks could visit for those types of exchanges if so inclined.
Thanks for the input Anna. I assumed linter was aware of the Discussion+ category so I did not mention it earlier. Alas! We all come here for different things and have different points of view on how the board should operate!
hank, I don't know why I am addicted to this site. The same was true when it was the one-liner NTIP Fund Alarm. I think it's OK if I don't know enough to be useful to the more expert posters here as long as I do not disrupt the fund discussions. I learn a lot of things I will never personally use other than for my own enjoyment or amazement. That's the way it is. I (and my ilk) bring no harm. I do wonder, at times, if it is also OK if a person's value added is zero. FA was pure and I was invisible. MFO has a lighter touch and I admit I participate in that lighter side for kicks. The difference, I think, is that like FA, I come for the investor insight; unlike FA I leave feeling like a distance relative but still family.
Thanks for the input Anna. I assumed linter was aware of the Discussion+ category so I did not mention it earlier. Alas! We all come here for different things and have different points of view on how the board should operate!
hank, I don't know why I am addicted to this site. The same was true when it was the one-liner NTIP Fund Alarm. I think it's OK if I don't know enough to be useful to the more expert posters here as long as I do not disrupt the fund discussions. I learn a lot of things I will never personally use other than for my own enjoyment or amazement. That's the way it is. I (and my ilk) bring no harm. I do wonder, at times, if it is also OK if a person's value added is zero. FA was pure and I was invisible. MFO has a lighter touch and I admit I participate in that lighter side for kicks. The difference, I think, is that like FA, I come for the investor insight; unlike FA I leave feeling like a distance relative but still family.
Anna, I cringe when I see you say "expert posters" Trust me, if you have been around as long as you say, you are as much a expert as them. Some are merely "Pretenders" and like to talk as if they are experts. Erudite ruminators as I like to call them. Yet if you followed their advice you would be in the poorhouse. Don't confuse knowledge with the ability to make money. Successful investing or trading is more in the realm of psychology than knowledge/intelligence.
@Anna said" I leave feeling like a distance relative but still family." Unfortunately -as @Hank noted** - sometimes M F O discussions bring to mind the old saw "you can pick your friends but not your relatives" **when heated discussions erupt on politics and social or constitutional matters I usually get frustrated quickly and pull away. I'd think there's other sites folks could visit for those types of exchanges if so inclined.
Honestly, after this thread I think I'll go back to reading the forum occasionally. Thank you for the note and anyone who wants to say hi can do so via the PM thing on here.
What has always made this forum great was the diversity of the posters and their views. This or that 'expert' have come and gone but the forum lives as does the quality of advice and information.
Comments
I wondered about them myself too. Sometimes people just move on ... to never be heard from again. I hope this is not the case with these two @Scott and @JohnChisum. Perhaps they will make a post soon.
In checking their log and last visit detail Scott's last visit was 1/3/16 and John's was sometime back in December 2015.
'I've decided to spend more time elsewhere. Less curmudgeons. I will check in from time to time but weeding through the "links" will be difficult.'
Scott is around, but not as active as previously.
David
---
Almost forgot to add: It's nice to see Scott's still around and I do miss John's unique commentaries from Down Under a lot.
Thanks for the input Anna. I assumed linter was aware of the Discussion+ category so I did not mention it earlier. Alas! We all come here for different things and have different points of view on how the board should operate!
I for one enjoy spirited debate (even occasional mud slinging) on issues financial. It helps in life to have a thick skin, as well as a sense of humor, and I believe the discussions here often foster both.
But when heated discussions erupt on politics and social or constitutional matters I usually get frustrated quickly and pull away. I'd think there's other sites folks could visit for those types of exchanges if so inclined.
Unfortunately -as @Hank noted** - sometimes M F O discussions bring to mind the old saw "you can pick your friends but not your relatives"
**when heated discussions erupt on politics and social or constitutional matters I usually get frustrated quickly and pull away. I'd think there's other sites folks could visit for those types of exchanges if so inclined.
Count your blessings, campers.
And so it goes,
peace,
rono