cvi : an unprecedented effort..., page-30

Don't get worked too worked up, I'm only stating what I believe to be true from my observations here. I could be wrong - so be it, I often am. No need to resort to oddball conspiracy theories, they don't tend to be good for anyone's health.... :)

My observations weren't specifically directed at CVI, rather they were general observations across a whole range of stock threads which share similar patterns.

To respond to a few of your comments:

1) I never said the downrampers on the CVI thread had any sort of sound reasoning behind them. I meant, they -think- they're helping to the debate, but really they are not as the comments they make are, as you say, drivel.

2) The comment about good hearted people losing money is just that, it happens, but not on any fault of the poster. The type of bias nothing to do with this as negative and positive bias both cause people to lose money.

3) No, I still think chat sites only work one way. From time to time people may think they're so good that whatever they say is 100% accurate, but in the end the truth prevails. You simply can't be accurate with stock predictions. Not even world leading fund managers can look you in the eye, say xxx stock is going up, and for you to buy it without realising that it is in the end a simple gamble. That's the nature of the market. Unpredictable. Reason has no effect - no matter how much information, research, or reasoning you try to bring to bear on a stock in the hope that you get a more accurate forecast, there are in the end unescapable limits to how far this takes you.

Now once anyone realises this, how can they be comfortable for people who are financially inexperienced to act on their comments? Knowing that they don't see the limits on the accuracy of your reasoning.

You say in your signature for people not to rely on your comments as advice but you're quite happy for people to do what you say. No doubt there are people out there who are treating your comments as instructions to buy, or sell. By their very actions they've treated what you say as advice, even though they'll deny it. Somewhat perplexing.

When I say pushing their side of the story, I'm only stating my observations. You'll notice, for example, when tastarga thinks a stock is crud he'll lay the boot into that stock. Everything he posts from then on, will be to express his initial position that the stock is crud, until he thinks the story has changed for the better or neutral. That's how people generally post here. Before the first word is typed, they've already made up their mind on a stock, and subsequent posts will reflect this.

4) Yes it's true, I'm sure there are people who downramp for personal benefits - e.g. to suck people into filling their order at the top. But most forums, from my observations, will be people who ramp their stocks to push the stock price up. Find any old XYZ resoures, check the thread, more likely than not you'll see rampers.

I see you've mis intrepreted most of the rest of my other comments, no point continuing.

I don't know how my first post was so hard to understand. I never once challenged the quality of your postings. I'm attacking those who follow comments on HC blindly. I'm attacking those who post negativity for the sake of it, not for the sake of bringing in reason. In fact there are heaps of people who I admire, who post negativity regularly. Tastarga is one, happychappy another, because they don't post crap.

anyway, I'm not even involved in the stock market anymore now. Only posted in the first place to express what I believe is the truth of how HC works. No one has to read it if they don't like it. I know I wouldn't have minded being aware of these views when I first started here.