Blunt Words
Blunt Words
Blunt Words
These words are very blunt, but necessary. I am confident that I could prove all of these assertions if I were required to do so. I would prefer not to, however, since it would be tedious and time consuming.
Intercst engages in a big lie strategy. Repeated often enough and loud enough, people will eventually believe a big lie. There is no way to defend oneself against it. You have to refute it convincingly every time it comes up. Many people will believe a big lie simply because someone is so insistent upon bringing it up. They assume that there must be a basis in fact even when there isn't. That is why intercst will prevail...at least, for another few months.
A person caught as the target of a big lie is frozen. Defending himself quickly consumes all of his time. He finds himself reacting to everything as if he were in a big lie environment. He simply does not have time to respond properly. He simply does not have enough time to discern honest comments from dishonest ones. As such, he assumes, because he has to assume, that people understand the full context and history behind a remark. They don't and that causes problems.
Please keep the big lie off of these boards. When you import the Motley Fool into these boards, you import the big lie with it. It is OK to raise questions as a result of your visiting those boards. Just don't bring those words into our environment. The big lie is hidden in them. You may not recognize it. I assure you that it is in them.
I find fault with hocus in this one thing and this one thing only: he has an intense love, an intense passion, for what the Motley Fool discussion boards could be. Sadly, they are something less.
Have fun.
John R.
These words are very blunt, but necessary. I am confident that I could prove all of these assertions if I were required to do so. I would prefer not to, however, since it would be tedious and time consuming.
Intercst engages in a big lie strategy. Repeated often enough and loud enough, people will eventually believe a big lie. There is no way to defend oneself against it. You have to refute it convincingly every time it comes up. Many people will believe a big lie simply because someone is so insistent upon bringing it up. They assume that there must be a basis in fact even when there isn't. That is why intercst will prevail...at least, for another few months.
A person caught as the target of a big lie is frozen. Defending himself quickly consumes all of his time. He finds himself reacting to everything as if he were in a big lie environment. He simply does not have time to respond properly. He simply does not have enough time to discern honest comments from dishonest ones. As such, he assumes, because he has to assume, that people understand the full context and history behind a remark. They don't and that causes problems.
Please keep the big lie off of these boards. When you import the Motley Fool into these boards, you import the big lie with it. It is OK to raise questions as a result of your visiting those boards. Just don't bring those words into our environment. The big lie is hidden in them. You may not recognize it. I assure you that it is in them.
I find fault with hocus in this one thing and this one thing only: he has an intense love, an intense passion, for what the Motley Fool discussion boards could be. Sadly, they are something less.
Have fun.
John R.
Hi, JWR.
I agree with the "big lie" approach. However, there are a number of items that hocus has gotten wrong (some minor, some major) and people of good will, imo, have tried to point these out. Sometimes they have been corrected, sometimes they have not.
I am strongly in favor of never mentioning that other gentleman's name or the tactics used, except to correct them here if they come up. I haven't seen that much of it but there is a little here, i agree.
hocus' passion needs to be tempered with an appreciation of the incredible environment we enjoy here (tip of the cap to es). I was ill-used elsewhere, but i certainly don't feel like people owe me a thank you for my efforts to "save" that board (it was imploding with a lack of fresh ideas because the best people were being sent packing with disturbing regularity): i did what i thought was right and if people appreciated it, great. if not, that's OK, too.
executive summary: hocus needs to chill. he also needs to appreciate what he continues to get wrong. he now has a number of very fine posters who won't contribute to his "incredible contribution to mankind."
respectfully (albeit equally bluntly),
I agree with the "big lie" approach. However, there are a number of items that hocus has gotten wrong (some minor, some major) and people of good will, imo, have tried to point these out. Sometimes they have been corrected, sometimes they have not.
I am strongly in favor of never mentioning that other gentleman's name or the tactics used, except to correct them here if they come up. I haven't seen that much of it but there is a little here, i agree.
hocus' passion needs to be tempered with an appreciation of the incredible environment we enjoy here (tip of the cap to es). I was ill-used elsewhere, but i certainly don't feel like people owe me a thank you for my efforts to "save" that board (it was imploding with a lack of fresh ideas because the best people were being sent packing with disturbing regularity): i did what i thought was right and if people appreciated it, great. if not, that's OK, too.
executive summary: hocus needs to chill. he also needs to appreciate what he continues to get wrong. he now has a number of very fine posters who won't contribute to his "incredible contribution to mankind."
respectfully (albeit equally bluntly),
regards,
wanderer
The field has eyes / the wood has ears / I will see / be silent and hear
wanderer
The field has eyes / the wood has ears / I will see / be silent and hear
wanderer wrote: Hi, JWR.
executive summary: hocus needs to chill. he also needs to appreciate what he continues to get wrong. he now has a number of very fine posters who won't contribute to his "incredible contribution to mankind."
respectfully (albeit equally bluntly),
Wanderer,
Sage comments as always. Hocus needs to realize that he can't treat the very people he needs to defeat intercst like s**t and then expect them to contribute to his board. I hope that the high-quality posters that are contributing to his board realize soon that they are being used as pawns in an anti-intercst jihad and an attempt to save face on TMF.
Hocus seems to think I owe him an apology. Hell will freeze over first. :xIf anyone owes an apology it is him to me. And I don't want him using any of my NFB studies as ammunition in his planned for-profit writings, orations, etc. He can do the hard work himself if he wants to write original stuff on SWR's - just don't steal mine. Hey ES, can he use my NFB posts in his for-profit endeavors without my (or your) permission?
A blunt but honest response.
I retire next year. Very belatedly 9 months ago I started looking for retirement income strategies. I read all the studies, all the books, all the web sites I could find. I looked for an internet board where I could think aloud, where my mistakes would be kindly corrected by more knowledgable people and where I could read and join in well-reasoned, rational, balanced, entertaining discussions on a variety of related topics including SWRs which to me are intellectually interesting. I found NFB. In my entire cyber-life I have been a member and posted at only two boards, NFB and a weight training board (OK, I admit to a recent free membership of TMF but I didn't have the patience to find all the controversial stuff amongst all the verbiage
). Therefore, as a relative newcomer to NFB, I bring no baggage with me from anywhere else. However I have tried to avoid issues that, having regard to previous history, may be sensitive (e.g. I would have refrained from recommending that it is worthwhile paying $5 to download the REHP report).
Nearly all the time, as you say jwr, I "have fun" but this is spoilt when, on many previous occasions, hocus seemed to have had some sort of immunity against criticism and some sort of special license or latitude to make factually incorrect and/or extremely biassed and/or irrational and/or very selective statements and there appeared to be a reluctance to correct him (generalising only). I can only conclude that this is a vote of sympathy for the way he was treated at TMF. I now note that some are placing on record their views on hocus's statements and some are giving him a hard time. I started going down the hard-time route but quickly withdrew, but if hocus continues with such statements then I will continue to make (hopefully) light-hearted comments so that a balance is maintained.
What is very disappointing to those who consider it is unproductive and irrelevant to pursue a personal crusade against the big lie is that hocus's conduct undermines and detracts from the important issues of SWRs and, in fact, does a great dis-service to his own cause against the big lie.
Therefore I regret I can't accept the big lie excuse for hocus's behaviour. I came to NFB for well-reasoned, balanced debate (even if I don't always agree) expressed in a reasonably civilised manner (not always too reasonable though, otherwise it's a bit boring). I don't expect to get facts given incorrectly or selectively presented in a way to suit a personal crusade against someone I don't have the slightest interest in. And I don't expect to see claims and ambitions for personal glory (except perhaps ES of course because he runs NFB and has to put up with all this :D)
I would not stop hocus posting, but I would hope that I'm not expected to restrain myself from responding because of the big lie issue. I don't know what went on at TMF - I only respond to what hocus includes in his statements.
As I say, a blunt but honest response - I hope it's taken as being in a friendly manner :).
I retire next year. Very belatedly 9 months ago I started looking for retirement income strategies. I read all the studies, all the books, all the web sites I could find. I looked for an internet board where I could think aloud, where my mistakes would be kindly corrected by more knowledgable people and where I could read and join in well-reasoned, rational, balanced, entertaining discussions on a variety of related topics including SWRs which to me are intellectually interesting. I found NFB. In my entire cyber-life I have been a member and posted at only two boards, NFB and a weight training board (OK, I admit to a recent free membership of TMF but I didn't have the patience to find all the controversial stuff amongst all the verbiage
Nearly all the time, as you say jwr, I "have fun" but this is spoilt when, on many previous occasions, hocus seemed to have had some sort of immunity against criticism and some sort of special license or latitude to make factually incorrect and/or extremely biassed and/or irrational and/or very selective statements and there appeared to be a reluctance to correct him (generalising only). I can only conclude that this is a vote of sympathy for the way he was treated at TMF. I now note that some are placing on record their views on hocus's statements and some are giving him a hard time. I started going down the hard-time route but quickly withdrew, but if hocus continues with such statements then I will continue to make (hopefully) light-hearted comments so that a balance is maintained.
What is very disappointing to those who consider it is unproductive and irrelevant to pursue a personal crusade against the big lie is that hocus's conduct undermines and detracts from the important issues of SWRs and, in fact, does a great dis-service to his own cause against the big lie.
Therefore I regret I can't accept the big lie excuse for hocus's behaviour. I came to NFB for well-reasoned, balanced debate (even if I don't always agree) expressed in a reasonably civilised manner (not always too reasonable though, otherwise it's a bit boring). I don't expect to get facts given incorrectly or selectively presented in a way to suit a personal crusade against someone I don't have the slightest interest in. And I don't expect to see claims and ambitions for personal glory (except perhaps ES of course because he runs NFB and has to put up with all this :D)
I would not stop hocus posting, but I would hope that I'm not expected to restrain myself from responding because of the big lie issue. I don't know what went on at TMF - I only respond to what hocus includes in his statements.
As I say, a blunt but honest response - I hope it's taken as being in a friendly manner :).
KenM
Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and annoys the pig.
Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and annoys the pig.
there are a number of items that hocus has gotten wrong (some minor, some major) and people of good will, imo, have tried to point these out.
If anyone points out any mistakes that I have made, I will post corrections on the SWR board. No one should be at all concerned about hurting my feelings by doing this sort of thing. I am planning to go public with this matter, and it's a lot better for me to have errors identified on a mesage board than with a letter to the editor to a national magazine. One of the big things that I can gain from participation at this board is to have people familiar with the subject area look over my stuff with a fine tooth comb and point out to me any mistakes before they do me too much damage.
If anyone points out any mistakes that I have made, I will post corrections on the SWR board. No one should be at all concerned about hurting my feelings by doing this sort of thing. I am planning to go public with this matter, and it's a lot better for me to have errors identified on a mesage board than with a letter to the editor to a national magazine. One of the big things that I can gain from participation at this board is to have people familiar with the subject area look over my stuff with a fine tooth comb and point out to me any mistakes before they do me too much damage.
I don't want him using any of my NFB studies as ammunition in his planned for-profit writings, orations, etc
I do intent to make use of your stuff, raddr. You are responsible for some of the most important research and some of the most important insights. I couldn't possibly tell the full story without making use of the work you have done.
You have put your work out in the public sphere, and you cannot control who makes use of it. There are limitations to the uses that I can make of your work, of course. I cannot take one of your posts and include the entire thing word for word in a "The Truth About SWRs" report that I write. But I can report your findings. I obviously will be giving you credit for having done the research. I also will let people know where you post, so that, if they have questions, they can come here to discuss the implications of the research you have done with you.
I do intent to make use of your stuff, raddr. You are responsible for some of the most important research and some of the most important insights. I couldn't possibly tell the full story without making use of the work you have done.
You have put your work out in the public sphere, and you cannot control who makes use of it. There are limitations to the uses that I can make of your work, of course. I cannot take one of your posts and include the entire thing word for word in a "The Truth About SWRs" report that I write. But I can report your findings. I obviously will be giving you credit for having done the research. I also will let people know where you post, so that, if they have questions, they can come here to discuss the implications of the research you have done with you.
- ElSupremo
- Admin Board Member
- Posts: 343
- Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 12:53 pm
- Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
Greetings raddr :)
The answer is an emphatic NO he can not! No one may use your material for their personal gain or otherwise without your permission. By posting here you give us permission to display your stuff. We have checked into this and even though this is public space you still have an implied copyright on your stuff. You have legal recourse if anyone uses your material outside of this space without your permission.
I am having a re-worded disclaimer put together at this time for our site in order to make personal copyright privileges clear to all of our members.
Hey ES, can he use my NFB posts in his for-profit endeavors without my (or your) permission?[/b]
The answer is an emphatic NO he can not! No one may use your material for their personal gain or otherwise without your permission. By posting here you give us permission to display your stuff. We have checked into this and even though this is public space you still have an implied copyright on your stuff. You have legal recourse if anyone uses your material outside of this space without your permission.
I am having a re-worded disclaimer put together at this time for our site in order to make personal copyright privileges clear to all of our members.
Last edited by ElSupremo on Mon Jul 28, 2003 4:49 am, edited 1 time in total.
- ElSupremo
- Admin Board Member
- Posts: 343
- Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 12:53 pm
- Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
Greetings hocus :)
Please see my previous post. I would suggest you be very careful about using any material that is not yours.
While I believe this to be true I am not positive of even this. From what I understand so far you can post links to others material and use "snippets" as a reference. If it were me I would consult with an attorney versed in copyright law(and I have) before I published anything. As an extra precaution I would seek permission from all those whose stuff I intended to use. Just to be on the safe side.
I do intent to make use of your stuff, raddr.
Please see my previous post. I would suggest you be very careful about using any material that is not yours.
But I can report your findings.
While I believe this to be true I am not positive of even this. From what I understand so far you can post links to others material and use "snippets" as a reference. If it were me I would consult with an attorney versed in copyright law(and I have) before I published anything. As an extra precaution I would seek permission from all those whose stuff I intended to use. Just to be on the safe side.
ElSupremo wrote:
The answer is an emphatic NO he can not! No one may use your material in whole or in part for their personal gain or otherwise without your permission. By posting here you give us permission to display your stuff. We have checked into this and even though this is public space you still have an implied copyright on your stuff. You have legal recourse if anyone uses your material outside of this space without your permission.
I am having a re-worded disclaimer put together at this time for our site in order to make personal copyright privileges clear to all of our members.
Hi ES,
Thanks for the clarification. My NFB posts are intended to benefit solely you and my other friends on this board, including anyone who wants to engage in a civilized exchange of ideas on FIRE topics. I detest the idea of my work being used for commercial profit, particularly where there is a chance that the profiteer in question may not properly interpret what I'm saying because he isn't a "numbers guy" or whatever.
Unless otherwise stated, I give NO ONE permission to use any of the content from any of my NFB posts for profit-making ventures of any sort .
I hope that clears things up a bit. :lol:
- ElSupremo
- Admin Board Member
- Posts: 343
- Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 12:53 pm
- Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
Greetings NFBers :)
A few snippets from our site rules:
Our site rules where put together to keep things as simple as possible. We are not responsible for personal copyright issues. However as a service to our members I will be adding language on this subject to our site rules. Honestly I never thought copyrights would be a problem on our boards. You learn something new every day. :roll:
A few snippets from our site rules:
You also agree not to post any copyrighted material unless the copyright is owned by you or you have consent from the owner of the copyrighted material.
Please note that we are not responsible for content of board messages. We do not warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any information presented.
Messages express the views of their author(s), not necessarily the views of NoFeeBoards.com.
Our site rules where put together to keep things as simple as possible. We are not responsible for personal copyright issues. However as a service to our members I will be adding language on this subject to our site rules. Honestly I never thought copyrights would be a problem on our boards. You learn something new every day. :roll:
We have checked into this and even though this is public space you still have an implied copyright on your stuff.
Of course he has a copyright. But that does not mean that others can not make use of the research he has done.
Every author of every book in the library has a copyright on his book. Does that mean that I may not make use of any of the books in the library to make a point in a paper that I am writing?
Once raddr publishes research on this site, the statement "a researcher named raddr looked into this question and found X" becomes a statement of fact. It is simply a fact that raddr has looked into certain questions and has come to certain conclusions as a result. I intend to make use of his findings in preparing a report on "The Truth About Safe Withdrawal Rates."
If raddr does subsequent research coming to different findings, I obviously will factor that into what I write. I want to present what the data says accurately. But my understanding is that it is not possible to copyright a fact, and it is a fact that raddr has done research into SWRs and come to certain findings on the questions he has examined.
Of course he has a copyright. But that does not mean that others can not make use of the research he has done.
Every author of every book in the library has a copyright on his book. Does that mean that I may not make use of any of the books in the library to make a point in a paper that I am writing?
Once raddr publishes research on this site, the statement "a researcher named raddr looked into this question and found X" becomes a statement of fact. It is simply a fact that raddr has looked into certain questions and has come to certain conclusions as a result. I intend to make use of his findings in preparing a report on "The Truth About Safe Withdrawal Rates."
If raddr does subsequent research coming to different findings, I obviously will factor that into what I write. I want to present what the data says accurately. But my understanding is that it is not possible to copyright a fact, and it is a fact that raddr has done research into SWRs and come to certain findings on the questions he has examined.
- ElSupremo
- Admin Board Member
- Posts: 343
- Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 12:53 pm
- Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
Greetings hocus :)
I agree. You can make use of that research, but you can't reproduce what the author has written. You could say "raddr had come to this conclusion" but you can not re-print his material without his permission. There are many gray areas and dark corners in copyright law. :?I am not qualified to interpret them. I can only do my best to do the right thing. Being a little over cautious can't hurt.
But that does not mean that others can not make use of the research he has done.
I agree. You can make use of that research, but you can't reproduce what the author has written. You could say "raddr had come to this conclusion" but you can not re-print his material without his permission. There are many gray areas and dark corners in copyright law. :?I am not qualified to interpret them. I can only do my best to do the right thing. Being a little over cautious can't hurt.