ZDO said:
btw SOCRATES none of us like to watch you shrink. But, sad to say, it’s happening! If you have indeed decided the dear readers up here are not qualified to hear the ‘truth’, please stay ‘big’ for your own sake, and desist from personal attacks on those making requests for other perspectives and serious inquiries into their own ‘unknowns’.
Was your process of indomitable struggle with questions always free of dumb questions?
Did you never have a time when you had an inaccurate inner model of the crowd(s) in markets?
However futile, did your mind never desire a new metaphor to hook up with?
Regarding the inefficiencies of people, could you possibly lay your hidden ‘truth of truths’ out in very concisely and coherent plain English and bear having not even one soul change their trading behaviours?
Snipers have a valuable role – but it’s my guess that most of the players up here on this forum see your contribution coming from a different role. Step up man – be ‘big’ and make us all bigger.
Thanks.
zdo
What happens is that when all of this descends into a pitful morass, the effort required to straighten it out is huge, nearly superhuman.
You cannot expect me to sit down here and write a fat textbook 10 inches thick in order to redress the balance as from my point iof view I have been given ample proof that to embark on such an endeavour is not worthwhile for several reasons.
You cannot expect me to fully explain and reveal my edge for each specific groups of scenarios, for each set of firm probabilities and for each particular tactic, and for each set and sub set of strategies, because if you were in my position you could not be persuaded to do it either.
You cannot expect me to act like some sort of unpaid nanny cum unrewarded mobile university.
You cannot expect me to expect me to be any of you, because you are you, and I am me.
You cannot expect me to devote endless time to you because you can't.
You cannot expect me to reveal all my thoughts to you, on command, at will, like you would access information by referring to an encyclopedia, because it is not practical or even fair.
You cannot expect me to continue to struggle against all odds and get involved in endless closed loop arguments without foundation, additionally tainted by disrespect and outright rudeness.
You cannot expect me to do all these things, which is what you probably want.
So what can you reasonably expect me to do ?
I can only reveal fundamental truths as far as I dare, because it is neither advisable nor prudent to do so in a public forum as you have to be ready to embrace these, and I can see that to do this openly in public is not wise.
So how can I be expected to impart to you what you need but cannot be given ?
In reply to your four questions, here are the answers :~
Dumb questions are to be avoided because they have to be recognised to be dumb in the first place. Dumb questions are not to be confused with questioning the improbable, or the apparently implausible or even the impossible, because when everything that is logical and rational is eliminated, that, which appears to be the most arcane, however improbable, has to be the ultimate truth.
There was a time, yes, when I had an inaccurate inner model but not of the crowds in markets but of the public in general. This is because I spent a very long time in isolation before I was able to crack the whole riddle from A ~ Z. I became disconnected from the mainstream everyday life and behaviour of people, in the sense that I became isolated from what is described as street wisdom (cheating, lying, tricking and stealing) and the world of beezness (plaigarising, unfair practices, taking advantage of, abusing, conning, lying, cheating and stealing) as opposed to the world of commerce, which is something very different.
Later on I recieved a series of shocks to discover how it is that individuals become corrupted by their refusal to act within a moral and ethical framework as a result of being corrupted by greed, impatience and dishonesty. It served to totally wreck any vestige of open and unconditional trust that was my yardstick up till then. It caused me to change my view radically of everything and everybody, and it caused me to be guarded to such an extent as not to accept anyone at face value anymore.
The answer to question number three is negative. This is because I never allowed myself to lose sight of my goals and to work relentlessly to achieve them. I did not allow myself to be distracted or misdirected in my quest. And every time that I was able to make progress, I proceeded to test the result in conjunction to everything else achieved to ensure that it was an extension and not subject to wilful force fitting. It caused me to test all the new ideas to destruction and to try to counter argue if and why they would not fit, and only accepted them if they did. I was only satisfied if these new ideas could be proven, and could stand up to the most rigorous inquisition and testing. Of course when you are dealing with abstract concepts, this is a very difficult and slow process.
In reply to question number 4, I do this all the time. What happens is that the message does not land, because the recipient(s) of the message do not consciously put their attention on the message itself, but instead become distracted or diverted or even offended, by the use of language in which it is delivered.
)?
