|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
<x-html><!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
First, let me be clear about something, I am not siding "for" or "against"
Norman Winski. I am not a student of his. I am not a friend
of a friend. I am simply offering a possible solution, that may be
more effective than the protocol that is currently in place.
To get quickly to the point, maybe a <u>Single Day</u> could be selected
where forum contributors were allowed to say, "Hey, it's me and I offer
services for sale etc. etc. etc." Before you quickly hit the delete
key, let me say that this issue is not going to go away. It really
does not do any good to punish Norm, if the intent is to resolve this very
long on-going problem. I know you don't want to operate a Spam Site,
and believe me, most of us don't want a Spam site. But is this "No
Ad Policy" really working? Somebody slips something in all of the
time, which of course divides the group into camps. This puts the
forum moderators in an awkward position. Sometimes the solution to
ban a first time offender is easy. Sometimes the enforcement of a
repeated offender is more delicate. At no time has the rule been
completely effective. I know that I am not running this site, or
paying for it's operation. So, I am not grinding an ax.
I am simply offering the suggestion to re-think the taboo of this "No Ad
Policy." There are many many people on this list with something to
sell. If you selected <u>One Day A Month</u>, you could give yourself
breathing room for aggressive enforcement of a policy that is difficult
at best to enforce. Maybe you could qualify them, or have them earn
advertisement credits. Maybe you could charge them $5. Maybe
one day a month would satisfy the need to say ... "Please think of me if
you are going to pay for something." Does this open a can of worms?
The can is already open.
<br>Pretending we don't have a problem, only allows it to get worse.
This week it is Norm, tomorrow it will be someone else, and we will rehash
this entire topic with 50 more e-mails. What is the difference ...
deleting 50 ads or deleting 50 objection posts? In the end, most
of who have been here for a while, figure out who is selling what.
Most of us have privately contacted a member of this forum regarding their
knowledge or services. I know that I have. If you create the
"senior skip day," you provide an outlet and a more manageable policy.
I do not have anything to sell, and this is not a self-promoting post.
Take this post for what it is ... a possible solution. I would hope
that we all think on creating a solution, instead of destroying each other
in the process. I wish the Forum Moderators, Norm, the yeas and the
nays ... the very best.</html>
</x-html>From ???@??? Sun Jan 23 10:11:11 2000
Return-Path: <listmanager@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Received: from mail.thetrellis.net ([208.179.56.11])
by purebytes.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id LAA14600
for <neal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Sun, 23 Jan 2000 11:17:42 -0800
Received: from REALTRADERS.COM
([208.179.56.198])
by mail.thetrellis.net; Sun, 23 Jan 2000 10:11:39 -0800
Received: from imo16.mx.aol.com by realtraders.com
with SMTP (MDaemon.v2.8.5.0.R)
for <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Sun, 23 Jan 2000 10:06:19 +0000
Received: from Proffittak@xxxxxxx
by imo16.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v24.6.) id f.c7.11dc26a (4595);
Sun, 23 Jan 2000 13:07:51 -0500 (EST)
From: Proffittak@xxxxxxx
Message-ID: <c7.11dc26a.25bc9d77@xxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2000 13:07:51 EST
Subject: [RT] Re: [: Intermediate / Longer Term Top? for S&P500
To: <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
CC: realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Windows AOL sub 45
X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
X-Return-Path: Proffittak@xxxxxxx
Sender: listmanager@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
X-MDMailing-List: realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
X-MDSend-Notifications-To: listmanager@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Reply-To: Proffittak@xxxxxxx
Status:
In a message dated 1/22/00 4:38:48 PM Eastern Standard Time,
bobrabcd@xxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
<< By weekly P/C does Baron's mean the Friday data or the summation of the
weeks put volume divided by the call volume? The attached chart uses a 5
day summation of the put volume divided by a 5 day summation of the call
volume. When the ratio turns up from below 0.5 thereabouts, it is bad news
for equities. Bad news could just be a consolidation into a horizontal
trading range or worse as in July of 1998. In '98 the critical level was
0.55 and in '99 it has dropped to .40 or lower which just shows how much
more activity there is this year with the increased call volume. The P/C
data in these charts is of the CBOE Total volumes, i.e. equities + indexes.
BobR >>
Very good question
Jim Pillard could you check this out in baron's and let bob know
thanks
Ben
|