|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
John Napier wrote:
Dear John,
The funny thing is that the same kind of criticism and name calling you vented
upon Astrology was
pointed toward Technical Analysis just a few years ago. Until about 30 years ago, a
market analyst dare not say that he uses Technical Analysis for fear of either not
getting hired or losing his job. Now many people are hopefully enlightened enough
to be open minded. In fact, when the International Society of Techical Analysis was
formed, in the early 80s, there was a big debate as to the definition of what
constituted Technical Analysis. At the insistance of several constituencies,
Astrology was included as a form of Market Technical Analysis. Just because a
methodology doesn't fit your particular bias doesn't mean it shouldn't be included
as a valid topic for discussion on this forum. If you were the arbiter of market
analysis, where would you draw the line? Should we exclude those methodologies
that are consiidered to be unorthodox? If yes, there goes Elliott Wave,
Fibonacci, Candelsticks, Gann, and any new ideas. Do you really want to throw a
bucket of ice water freezing innovation and sharing on this forum? I think a vote
of the RT e-mail list members would be in favor of innovation and sharing.
Otherwise, it will be only a short time before this forum will be like a ghost
town. If you don't like the topic, I am sure your delete key will take care of the
problem for you.
Freely,
Norman
> Several days ago the web master asked that all you
> astrologers converse with each other privately through your
> own email.
> THAT IS STILL AN EXCELLENT IDEA.
> I don't want to start a rumble here but why don't we get off
> this CRAP and get back to sharing good trading ideas and
> information that will
> improve our trading techniques. THAT'S WHAT THIS FORUM IS
> ABOUT. Not astrology or sun worshipping or occultic signs.
> Whoever started this thing why don't you give all those
> others who have joined in with their special signs YOUR
> private email or still better, why don't you start your own
> web page just for that stuff.
> I, Like you, don't want to offend anyone..BUT you have
> offended me. So lets call it quits right now while you are
> ahead.
>
> TTrue61470@xxxxxxx wrote:
> >
> > In a message dated 5/12/99 7:46:59 AM Central Daylight Time, chmeyer@xxxxxxxx
> > writes:
> >
> > << I'm no rocket scientist, especially as it relates to quant skills--
> > but isn't it silly to consider this a valid sample base; and size? >>
> >
> > I totally agree. At the risk of getting the administration mad at me I'd like
> > to point out a few things about astrology.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Napier John <Jnapier@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Napier John
> <Jnapier@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Netscape Conference Address
> Netscape Conference DLS Server
> Additional Information:
> Last Name John
> First Name Napier
> Version 2.1
|