|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
At 04:45 AM 3/28/2008, you wrote:
This is the first list I joined
and came across some very generous people here who set me on the on the
path of learning whatever I know of trading. While some of them are still
here , the list is not even an iota of what it was. Part of the
credit for the list's demise rests squarely on [a] those who tried
to abuse it for commercial purposes and [b] those who could not
appreciate the merit of the posts of the members who were also vendors of
products/services abd disrespected such members. Part of the credit I am
afraid goes to absolute lack of leadership in those who have been
entrusted with minding this group. The wealth of knowledge that still
exists in the senior membership of this list has been allowed to go
waste.
Strong accusations, now let's see some proof.
First, you state that a major problem with the list is those people who
tried to exploit it for commercial purposes and then, immediately state
that the next thing wrong with it is that members were controlled with
regard to posting commercial content. You finally give a large
measure of credit for the problems to the management but offer no
information with regard to what mistakes that management made or what you
suggest to make the list better. All I was able to glean from your
mail is that you want less commercialism but you want the members to be
able to post commercial information and management has failed somehow
with something .. Do I sound a little angry? I hope so. My
paycheck for running this list isn't so very large and I have a lot of
experience running lists. I love ideas. I love
criticism. I love suggestions for improvement. What I hate is
complaints without suggestions of how to improve things. When
people complained about my strict policies on advertising, I loosened it
up. When they complained again about it, I, for all practical
purposes, removed it. Now you say part of the problem is the
commercial content rules. What rules? How do you want these
rules, (whatever they are), changed? You then go on to say that the
rest of the problem is my management.
Well, I reviewed my management over the past two years. It has
consisted of changing the rules on advertising here on 3 occasions to
conform to what membership seem to want. It consisted of the
removal of 2 members and a few minor reminders about policy to the
list. Would you describe that as too much management or too little
management or just bad management? Please define how you would have
done it better and offer suggestions for how it can be done better
now.
Bob
R
Jeffrey Harteam <jharteam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
- This is really bad. Somebody just
got removed for posting a nice article for me to read.!!! BobKC ,
your rules I?m sorry to say are very wrong. No wonder, no one wants
to post anything here ever again. Just ridiculous!!.
-
- Have a good one
- Jeff Harteam
- Hong Kong
-
- -----Original Message-----
- From: realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[
mailto:realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Robert Pardo at
Mindspring
- Sent: Friday, March 28, 2008 6:13 AM
- To: realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: RE: [RT] Not merry for Meriwether - John Meriwether Must
Scramble Again - member dropped / ?
-
- Is the reason for
the ban on these articles because of the potential for useless or agenda
bearing content?
-
- Regards,
-
- Bob
-
- From: realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[
mailto:realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of BobsKC
- Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 4:54 PM
- To: realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: RE: [RT] Not merry for Meriwether - John Meriwether Must
Scramble Again - member dropped
-
- I too was interested in the
article and I read it. I would have also read it had there been a
link to it posted rather than embedding it.
- Bob
- At 05:35 PM 3/27/2008, you wrote:
- Having worked with John many years ago at Salamon Brothers, I was
very interested in the story.
-
- I personally have no objection to good quality material like this
being posted to the group.
-
- Regards,
-
- Bob Pardo
-
- From: realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [
mailto:realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mark Simms
- Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 3:55 PM
- To: realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: RE: [RT] Not merry for Meriwether - John Meriwether Must
Scramble Again - member dropped
-
- Can someone tell me what the difference is between placing a LINK
into the email message
- versus the embedded FULL TEXT ?
-
- No difference IMHO except that the embedded technique is more
convenient.
-
-
- From: realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[
mailto:realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Clyde Lee(swb)
- Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 3:21 PM
- To: realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [RT] Not merry for Meriwether - John Meriwether Must
Scramble Again
- Bob,
- Even though you don't like the idea it seems
- that in the short run you may have to go to
- monitoring messages since your sense of
- the behavior of members does not seem to
- be correct ! ! !
-
- Clyde
-
-
- ----- Original Message -----
- From: Deosaran Bisnath
- To:
realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 12:50 PM
- Subject: [RT] Not merry for Meriwether - John Meriwether Must
Scramble Again
-
A Decade Later,
John Meriwether
Must Scramble
Again
-
- LTCM Founder Has Tough Time
- Stemming Losses at New Funds;
- A Withdrawal Deadline Nears
- By JENNY STRASBURG
Never miss a thing.
Make Yahoo your homepage.
__._,_.___
![]()
__,_._,___
|