If I start blogging again on stocks I own, I'll probably not mention names--focusing only on method alone. It's not something that's done by 5000 other bloggers or even 1 and it actually zeroes in on the thing that matters most long-term.
Instead, expect witty commentary on financial news of the day, as well as a guide to some of Daniel's favorite business blogs. Here's a taste, an excerpt from a recent post, "Mated: Financial Blogs":
What would happen if the Hubble Telescope, noted for its ability to see far beyond what any normal person can, mated with the lyrical talent of Bob Dylan? A blog written by Macro Man of course.
If sliced bread, the daily item so important even Jesus begged his Father for it, mated with the greatest economic and business thinkers of our day, what would be the result? Abnormal Returns.
What would happen if Mae West, a pop icon of old famous for her wit, mated with Bruce Lee, the bad-ass martial arts master famous for his awesomeness? Too easy, I know. A site called Dealbreaker.
Posts
19 comments:
now lets hope stockdocx doesnt stalk him
Daniel has vowed to never again put out any advice that can be measured as to accuracy.
Probably a good defense mechanism after his 2008 performance.
I don't know what the deal is with this conflict between various characters--I was a lurker on gurufocus before but didn't visit it as much in the past--but there is a huge difference between those that post picks versus those that don't. There is nothing wrong with not suggesting specific picks but it's a totally different game.
Unless you are macro-oriented, or news-oriented, or something in that manner; without specific picks, credibility is non-existent. But many don't take a position, in investing or life or anything else for that matter...
Alex, I changed my name to Stalkdocx
Both of you should admit you can't "analyze" and just follow me and Buffet to "riches".Peace
Those rumors you may have heard about my being gay...
are true.
Peace.
Definitely can't thank you for reporting this one, Dave, but you probably knew that.
Just a note to Sivaram: I said that if I start blogging again on stocks I own I'll "probably not mention names"--focusing on method alone.
Price's dishonesty here--as elsewhere--is easy to see. That's all I'll say on that.
The reason I said the above, on blogging, is that it would be unique, the focus would be on what matters long-term, and on what I find particularly interesting.
If one's purpose is simply to learn, they're not worried about whether others think they are better or worse than anyone else. (Of course this also assumes a modicum of self-esteem.)
My purpose is and always has been simply that--to learn. Partly because I wasn't getting good feedback, partly because I wanted to do something more unique, and partly because Price was sending a bunch of nasty messages each day for me to summarily delete, I ended the old blog.
Anyway, I don't want anybody to confuse me with someone who does not have definite opinions--or is afraid to share them. But am I a person who wants to share ideas with little feedback, and where there is a vocal heckler? Not at all.
That's all for my discussion here. I honestly want no part of this type of atmosphere.
Daniel,
Didn't see your request on the comment thread of your eponymous blog not to post a link to your S.I. blog until after I had scheduled this post.
Regarding critical commenters, I've learned some things (and frankly, I would have been better off had I listened more) to some of the more critical or questioning comments on my blog (including a couple good ones from you, early on). But if you want tighter control over your readership, you may want to consider making your new blog invitation-only. I'm not sure how to do that offhand, but I know it's possible because I've clicked on an occasional commenter's profile name who has had an invitation-only blog.
In any case, I'll refrain from posting a link to your other new blog, and I wish you the best of luck with them.
Dave, I don't have a blog on this or any other site, so don't know the logistics, but are you able to remove comments yourself?
Why not exercise some editorial discretion and just delete the comments on here that are unrelated to the post, or are merely more childish back and forth between folks.
Maybe if you did this a few times, people would just quit it. It honestly makes me want to stop reading the blog, it's so tedious. By my count, of the 8 comments on this post, only 2 are legitimate contributions. Deleting the other crap posts won't deprive anyone of constructive comments from people, as you noted in one of your earlier comments.
I think micromanaging the comments would be an excercise in futility, and quickly compound into more whining about other's comments. The blog comments on this site are pretty tame compared to elsewhere, and no one is forced to read them anyway. I haven't seen a serious comment go ignored on account of the frivolous ones.
Albert,
Yes, I'm able to delete comments, though readers will see a message that the comment has been deleted. I'll take your suggestion under consideration, but there are a few reasons why, as a matter of policy, I haven't been deleting comments so far.
The first is that I don't want to waste time doing it. The second is that, contrary to your thought that deleting an offending post would prompt the commenter to stop writing such posts in the future, it can have the opposite effect. I think Daniel found that to be the case on his original blog.
The third reason is that I don't want anyone to think I am arbitrarily deleting comments that are critical of my posts. The fourth reason is that I don't want to discourage good commenters from commenting, out of concerns that their posts will be arbitrarily deleted. For example, I've stopped commenting on the I-Hub board for one of the stocks I own, because the moderator deleted my recent comments for what I considered to be arbitrary or dubious reasons.
Wasn't going to add more here but just want to say I retract the slightest bit of a jab towards Dave in my last comment.
I didn't think it was an honest error but it seems it was--and anyway I should be thankful for all the non-crazy people that his post will send my way.
So no hard feelings, Dave, and thanks.
Also check out this new blog:
The Wahlmighty Stockpicker-
AKA "Systematically Impotent"
AKA: "Stocks that can't go up".
No worries, Daniel.
I hope you will reconsider participating here occasionally though -- your input would be welcome.
Great photo of Bruce Lee on your blog, btw. When you get to your series on pop culture, you ought to consider a post on the best martial arts movies of each of the last few decades. I think Enter the Dragon would be a shoe-in for the 1970s.
Daniel's other new blog "the Guru Five" - no, it's not a new rock band- has seven linked pieces that have drawn a total of ZERO comments from anybody.
Obviously, the material he's presenting is not too interesting to any of his sparse readersship.
They'd rather know 'methodology' on how to ride mining stocks to delisting while insisting that "things are going to get better".
Hackensack,
I think you did a huge mistake by publishing the new blog details where this moron is going to stalk everyday. Moreover he is making this blog comments' section horrible to read every passing day.
There should be another placewhere he can take his personal frustrations to rather than whoring this blog. May be to his own home for starters.
NONE of MY picks have EVER gone to zero. Compounding interest from "proven winners" such as MO is boring but it WORKS. Something stockdocx and Daniel both "could learn" from.Peace
BillyTickets,
If you'd like to e-mail me a post summarizing your investment methodology, maybe I'll edit it for clarity (e.g., take out your excessive use of quotation marks) and most it here. Other perspectives are always welcome.
Post a Comment