|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
<x-html><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META content=text/html;charset=iso-8859-1 http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META content='"MSHTML 4.72.3110.7"' name=GENERATOR>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=2>Hello, </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>I am looking for a way to put regression channel on my
charts. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Does anyone have an ela that will do this?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Thanks.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Andrew.</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>
</x-html>From ???@??? Sat May 15 19:52:36 1999
Received: from list.listserver.com (198.68.191.15)
by mail05.rapidsite.net (RS ver 1.0.2) with SMTP id 13874
for <neal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Fri, 14 May 1999 05:01:15 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by accessone.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/PIH) with SMTP id CAA24060;
Fri, 14 May 1999 02:00:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from front4.grolier.fr (front4.grolier.fr [194.158.96.54])
by accessone.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/PIH) with ESMTP id BAA23898
for <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Fri, 14 May 1999 01:59:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from default (Annecy-2-230.club-internet.fr [195.36.130.230])
by front4.grolier.fr (8.9.3/No_Relay+No_Spam_MGC990224) with SMTP id KAA03106;
Fri, 14 May 1999 10:58:58 +0200 (MET DST)
Message-Id: <00a401be9de7$c2566280$e68224c3@xxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 10:22:31 +0200
Reply-To: tedco@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: owner-realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: "ted stampeen" <tedco@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: RealTraders Discussion Group <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: GEN: Astro-Finance, Realtraders Survey Results
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-To: <ist@xxxxxx>, "RealTraders Discussion Group" <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3
X-Listprocessor-Version: 8.1 -- ListProcessor(tm) by CREN
X-Loop-Detect: 1
X-UIDL: 76caddc0a420379ab77dbebeef2e183c.86
AS late philosopher VOLTAIRE once said
"I TOTALLY DISAGREE WITH YOU, BUT WILL DEFEND TO THE DEATH YOUR RIGHT TO
SAY IT"
-----Original Message-----
From: Ira <ist@xxxxxx>
To: RealTraders Discussion Group <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: jeudi, 13. mai 1999 22:51
Subject: Re: GEN: Astro-Finance, Realtraders Survey Results
>I don't believe in astrology as a trading tool. To say it is wrong, I
can't. There are a
>lot of people who make money using it. I do believe that the moon, sun,
stars and planets
>in their rotation and interaction do affect human behavior to a certain
degree. This is in
>part proven by the criminal reports and disturbances during a full moon.
>
>If these interactions affect human behavior, then it must affect the stock
and futures
>markets to a degree because they are, in part, a reflection of human
behavior in one area
>of society. So I won't discard astrology as being ineffective, just not
suited to my
>needs as a trader. so use it if it works for you and look for something
else if it
>doesn't. This is an information and discussion group, not a place to seek
converts. Ira
>
>"Norman E. Phair" wrote:
>
>>
>> Back in the early 60's Fidelity had a technical
>> department. They did not advertise it, very few
>> people new about it. I would venture to say no other
>> mutual fund management company had such a
>> department. I attribute their superior performance
>> back then to this department which was run by Chet
>> Pado. One of the best performing funds was managed
>> by Jerry Tsai, for those of you out there who may
>> remember his name. In 1962 as the market started
>> down, he went into approximately 30% cash in two
>> weeks. Technical analysis was somewhat of a voodoo
>> culture back in that era. Fidelity did not tell
>> people because if you were a
>> technican back then people looked at you at little
>> funny. Boy have times changed. The money that
>> technicians are paid now by the major brokerage houses
>> is unbelievable. Does it pay to be different?
>> Should you keep your opinions to yourself if the
>> majority of people out there do not agree? What
>> happened to the old theory of contrary opinion? I
>> do NOT use astrology in my trading.
>>
congratulate anyone
>> who uses it or any
>> other method that works. Why do people criticize
>> something when they do not know anything about ? I
>> guess it is human nature. If they can not carry on
>> an intelligent conversation about a subject, because
>> they do not have the knowledge, the subject has no
>> merit. There are died in the wool fundamentalists
>> that manage money who
>> think technical analysis is not worth anything.
>>
>> Norman E.
>>
>> > S teve McGuire wrote:
>> >
>> > > John,
>> > > Sounds like a very closed minded approach. If some
>> > > people can make astro work for
>> > > trading, why not show a little tolerance. It is the
>> > > lack of tolerance and
>> > > flexibility that is the root of many of our
>> > > problems today and throughout history.
>> > >
>> > > John Napier wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > 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.
>
>
|