Chart, page-1955

@kasta1

I make every effort to not insult anyone or make it personal...I mean only to
provide an alternative assessment when I think it is warranted.
I thought that was a major part of the point of HC.
When I read someone's posts about, for example, Technology (of which I
have a rather moderate knowledge base) it is to gain a better understanding of
something. I like to think that when they make use of certain terms or concepts,
that their choice of carries its generally accepted meaning, and that I would
find the same definition in a textbook or other educational reference. Effective and
non-misleading communication relies on common terminology for things. If most of
the world did not respect that idea life would become rather tedious.
If someone on a fundamental thread posted financial figures that were not exactly
accurate, I would be grateful if someone pointed that out...
When someone uses the term Spiking Neural Network, I would hope they
are not really referring to an Analog Neural Network, or something that
does not fit that definition. I am absolutely certain that there are others who feel the
same. Could go on forever with examples.

It is not a discredit to anyone's intelligence! And that comment is the only reason
I am replying to you. A person is not intellectually challenged because their knowledge
of a specific area is not that vast, so please do not think that is what I am implying.
Chart patterns have a long history of academic research and study behind them.
Perhaps where we truly differ is on the significance of that fact.
I apologize if my comments are frustrating to you (or anyone else). Please feel free
to use the ignore button.
Enjoy your weekend.