Nemo Me Impune Lacessit: The Black Watch
During a multi part missive of epic length, as in biblical, we recently received some comments over at Seeking Alpha.
From Steve 4: "the economy is rolling along in spite this bowl of noodles you served up for our Xmas dinner. What is your point? Or your prediction?"
From Lehman: "Amen. The summary bullets at the beginning should be a statement of the main thesis, not a laundry list. If it's an "examination", one looks for a clue of what is discovered."
From Brennzn: "I have been searching for your epiphanical development after reading Part 1 at Christmas-time; following the stars NN. I will provide a succinct synopsis after devotedly studying Parts 2 - 5 which may take months."
From Marlin Spikes: "looking for the TL:DR (too long;did not read ) summary..."
From HW12: "Data provided here is available for Wall Street players, thus is known and priced into the market. If you want to address a specific company issue then do it. This is not reading, this is like a packet placed on fund managers' desks."
The Nattering One muses... We are reminded of Neal Stephenson’s rule that “arguing with anonymous strangers on the Internet is a sucker’s game – they turn out to be indistinguishable from self-righteous sixteen-year-olds with infinite free time.” As for these assclowns, trolls and their asshattery... we find Barry Ritholtz's comment policy so well put as to be the definitive guide.
In fact, Ritholtz's The Big Picture posting comment advisory, reads as follows; "Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous."
We could not have said it better. Addressing the comments quoted above and any others along those lines, I refer you to Summarize and Simplify, Please and respond as follows...
I respect opinions regarding subject matter, but can do without the unwarranted sense of entitlement. As the reader is not under duress, what one discovers or takes away is in the eye of the beholder and a matter of choice. This is not a thesis or a book you purchased, this is a missive, please do look up the definition. Be advised that your misconceptions and misguided sense of entitlement will never dictate my methods. In other words, this is how I roll.
The overwhelming sense of entitlement is absurd and undeserved. The sense of entitlement generation we suffer from, suffered from over parenting. And, in closing...
From Steve 4: "the economy is rolling along in spite this bowl of noodles you served up for our Xmas dinner. What is your point? Or your prediction?"
From Lehman: "Amen. The summary bullets at the beginning should be a statement of the main thesis, not a laundry list. If it's an "examination", one looks for a clue of what is discovered."
From Brennzn: "I have been searching for your epiphanical development after reading Part 1 at Christmas-time; following the stars NN. I will provide a succinct synopsis after devotedly studying Parts 2 - 5 which may take months."
From Marlin Spikes: "looking for the TL:DR (too long;did not read ) summary..."
From HW12: "Data provided here is available for Wall Street players, thus is known and priced into the market. If you want to address a specific company issue then do it. This is not reading, this is like a packet placed on fund managers' desks."
The Nattering One muses... We are reminded of Neal Stephenson’s rule that “arguing with anonymous strangers on the Internet is a sucker’s game – they turn out to be indistinguishable from self-righteous sixteen-year-olds with infinite free time.” As for these assclowns, trolls and their asshattery... we find Barry Ritholtz's comment policy so well put as to be the definitive guide.
In fact, Ritholtz's The Big Picture posting comment advisory, reads as follows; "Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous."
We could not have said it better. Addressing the comments quoted above and any others along those lines, I refer you to Summarize and Simplify, Please and respond as follows...
I respect opinions regarding subject matter, but can do without the unwarranted sense of entitlement. As the reader is not under duress, what one discovers or takes away is in the eye of the beholder and a matter of choice. This is not a thesis or a book you purchased, this is a missive, please do look up the definition. Be advised that your misconceptions and misguided sense of entitlement will never dictate my methods. In other words, this is how I roll.
The overwhelming sense of entitlement is absurd and undeserved. The sense of entitlement generation we suffer from, suffered from over parenting. And, in closing...
Comments