A Can of Worms . . .

[fxmarkets]

"I remember a converastion I had with a lady who much regretted her divorce, and commented that she missed her ex husband, if only to throw saucepans at him"

I like that one....... A lot..

 

[TheBramble]

What a lot of replyzzzzzzzzzzzzz......

Thanks StarSpacer for continuing in your previous mode and saving me the trouble of taking the trouble.

Thanks Bertie for continuing to confirm what really no longer needs confirmation, but for being there all the same.

Thanks Silvia for the Parsley metaphor...wasn't lost on me at all dear. As for the others, who knows? They have their own worlds to contend with. Hateful ones at that. Poor things.

Considering the intent of the originator of this thread, Tim, unfortunately, it has I am sorry to say, answered your question I suspect. But don't give up. The normal folk in the 'other' threads still welcome your inputs, and mine.

 

[SOCRATES]

On the contrary Bramble, Bertie is correct in all of his posts, excepting the slur, which I assume was a Socratic Paradox. We know that Athenian Socrates believed that "virtue is knowledge." In other words, If one knows the good, one will always action the good. Anyone who does anything wrong doesn't really know what the good is. Thus for Bertie, it could be that this was sufficient justification to question a person’s moral position, for if they have incorrect or insufficient knowledge about “psychological activity”, “soul”, “excellence”, “justice or any other ethical idea, they can't be trusted to do the right thing. I am sure that Bertie will speak for himself, I am simply putting forward a possible explanation for his post.
A rather sweeping statement, Bramble, which serves, ipso facto, to prove Bertie’s posting “To tell someone who is ignorant of a fact and persists in insisting is perfectly acceptable, because to be patently ignorant is not an insult, it is a statement of fact. To be ignorant is a normal state of being for everybody until they are given the correct information and then they cease to be so.”
You have simply offered both an unintentional self-critique and self-parody, which precisely proves Bertie’s point. I suggest you re-read his posts more carefully and, most importantly, THINK about the contents.

Most people, Bramble? You have statistical evidence of course to back up your premise? No, I thought not. Again, unintentional self-parody which simply serves to make you look foolish, I’m afraid.

No I am not saying this at all. Bertie questions as a means of instruction, to compel the uninformed to think a problem through to a logical conclusion. The robustness of his discourse has no relevance, and may even be helpful in encouraging them to think more lucidly.

Passive indifference becomes malignant in a moment of crisis and this is the point. Circumstances are manipulated (whether intentional or not) so that you can believe in your own mind that persons have somehow hurt you and deserve to suffer for it.

Yes, it is clear that you have not grasped their meaning. I suggest you conduct an Einsteinian "Deep Thought Experiment." You might find it brings an amazing wealth of insights and clarity to your current muddled thinking.

The problem for a lot of people is that they speed read as a matter of habit. Unfortunately, a whole tranche of meaning can be lost by overlooking the significance of only one word in the whole text. It is as if the text has been read and seems like gibberish, and only because one word, or even a comma or a full stop has been missed. Often the misreading of the slightest can cause the misunderstanding of the whole.

As this profession has a prime requirement, I am willing to provide it up to a certain point, and only to a certain point, and no further.

What I am willing to provide is to stimulate people to think. Thinking is a very important excercise for traders. I do not mean wishful thinking, daydreaming, musing, imagining, toying, I mean the application of concentrated thought.

Concentrated thought yields benefits in trading, all other kinds of thinking do not.

Concentrating thought in this way is a habit to be cultivated as it yields results, in everything.

It is very easy for individuals to succumb to what is not thought, but passes for it. As a result of this they are apt to adopt postures they can live to regret when pennies start to drop, specially when the pennies that subsequently drop are not the ones they expect.

But the pennies they cause to drop are as a consequence of their original postures, which are not forgotten, or forgiven, in any event, as it is too late in the day to seek remedies, however cosmetic, but ultimately meaningless.

Therefore, thought is everything.

We succceed or fail according to the quality of our thinking. It is the quality of thought that succeeds in opening doors, or slamming them shut.

 

[SOCRATES]

"I remember a converastion I had with a lady who much regretted her divorce, and commented that she missed her ex husband, if only to throw saucepans at him"

I like that one....... A lot..

Yes, she did not pause to consider the possibility he would throw them back at her with added force.....you know...some people just cannot recognise when they are well off ....

...they are apt to act unwisely...

 

[SOCRATES]

I forgot to add....She admitted that there was nothing wrong with their marriage....He was a Commander in the Royal Navy. She didn't like Portsmouth, nor Cyprus, nor Malta, nor Hong Kong, nor Singapore.........She did not enjoy the life of a Naval Officer's wife...but she ended up all alone.... renting a bedsitter in Notting Hill...and grumbling about her fate to anyone who would listen to her woes...

 

[fxmarkets]

hmm, it sems its all to do with accepting difference, things (it seems at my current level of thinking )are forced when people attempt to change the difference between two individuals , rather than be accepting of and embracing difference between themselves.. Is it that they or one must feel similar? Or do they feel insecure that opinions/ (likely not views) are not the same.... I see it as why should it be a big deal...? why is it a very big deal for many people.... the wanting to be approved correct in common thought. amongst many... the approval of it....

 

[fxmarkets]

what did she like/want/feel the need for ? what was you take on it soc?

 

[SOCRATES]

what did she like/want/feel the need for ? what was you take on it soc?

She (thought she) wanted to be in charge. She expected him to give up his Naval Career because she did not like "being shifted around from Naval Base to Naval Base", or the Admiral's Cocktail Parties, or the Xmas Party at the Officers' Mess.

But of course, anyone who knows anything about women will concur that women like a man who challenges, in the nicest possible way, is charming, and knows how to tease, etc., and is not a wimp, and just says, "OK" and just gives in.

This is the reason for her pent up animosity towards him and her desire to throw saucepans, for no other reason that he allowed her to (in her eyes) to take control, as a result of her own natural inbuilt femenine reflex mechanism, against what she really wanted = the exact opposite.

 

[SOCRATES]

hmm, it sems its all to do with accepting difference, things (it seems at my current level of thinking )are forced when people attempt to change the difference between two individuals , rather than be accepting of and embracing difference between themselves.. Is it that they or one must feel similar? Or do they feel insecure that opinions/ (likely not views) are not the same.... I see it as why should it be a big deal...? why is it a very big deal for many people.... the wanting to be approved correct in common thought. amongst many... the approval of it....

Fx, you don't understand. I will explain to you. Women classify men into different categories.
To them we are either bonking material or providers.

They view us in a very different way to the way we view them. The great majority of men not only do not understand the workings of woman's mind, they are completely oblivious of what women really want. In consequence of this all sorts of misunderstandings occur between the sexes.

When a man and a woman meet, she instinctively sets out to classify which category he falls under. She does this in various ways, body language, inflection, posture, confidence or lack of it, and she prods to find out what he is really made of. He is oblivious of this "semaphore" taking place, and behaves in a wimpish manner, trying to please her and create an impression by agreeing, offering, flattering, etc.,

This does not present a challenge to a woman. She is probably pestered silly by cloying men who behave like this. She is accustomed to being able to manipulate and to handle men who can be "manipulated".

Men who cannot be manipulated pose a tremendous challenge to women of all ages. They are the ones women chase, because they make themselves tantalisingly unattainable, unpredictable, exciting, different, and ultimately a challenge.

Many relationships start with a challenge situation. Then they mature into a situation dominated by loyalty, love, affection, comfort etc.,

The second replaces the first if the man forgets to keep up the challenge.

The consequence of this is that the relationship can break up if the feelings she develops in the second phase evaporate for whatever reason.

The art is to balance both, and to sustain them.

And that is not only the secret of attracting women, but being able to keep them.

And that is exactly what happened in the case of Mrs Saucepan.

 

[fxmarkets]

my post regarding acceptance of difference was relating to general human behaviour, non gender specific, not referring to mrs saucepan....... but yes. I'm aware of men are from mars and women from venus syndrome/ philospohy of difference between the 2. long may it shall live.......

 

[SOCRATES]

Fx, I further forgot to tell you....it is up to US to provide the profile women crave. It is up to us to choose, and not for them to choose for us. This is the mistake the Commander made. The result turned out to be a comedy of errors that neither he nor she consciously understood. I don't know about him, but certainly she was riddled with regret, and that regret was the source of her discontent.

Let this be a lesson to us all men to handle the ladies properly.

Goodnight. cor !

 

[JumpOff]

what a very limited view!

Fx, you don't understand. I will explain to you. Women classify men into different categories.
To them we are either bonking material or providers.

Men can also be teachers, students, friends, coworkers, counselors, etc..

JO

 

[starspacer]

What a lot of replyzzzzzzzzzzzzz......

Thanks StarSpacer for continuing in your previous mode and saving me the trouble of taking the trouble.

Thanks Bertie for continuing to confirm what really no longer needs confirmation, but for being there all the same.

Thanks Silvia for the Parsley metaphor...wasn't lost on me at all dear. As for the others, who knows? They have their own worlds to contend with. Hateful ones at that. Poor things.

Considering the intent of the originator of this thread, Tim, unfortunately, it has I am sorry to say, answered your question I suspect. But don't give up. The normal folk in the 'other' threads still welcome your inputs, and mine.

Empty verbiage, I’m afraid Bramble. Your post really typifies the refuge of an intellectually lazy scoundrel. Your lack of rhetorical flourish or coherence to cover up the weaknesses in your arguments suggest an apogee of slothful and apathetic thought.

It is always the easiest option to imply that certain post contributors are not worthy of your attention. Indeed, the more it is indulged, the more frequent this argument becomes. Metaphorically, it reminds me of the original 1978 classic ‘Dawn of the Dead’ since what was truly frightening about Romero’s creatures was that they lulled you into thinking that these lumbering ghouls were no match for us humans, whose lapse into apathy was soft and imperceptible. That was their truly awesome power.

Like the 70's retro fashion disasters of the film, Bramble, you really need to update your thoughts.

 

[silviaic]

I forgot to add....She admitted that there was nothing wrong with their marriage....He was a Commander in the Royal Navy. She didn't like Portsmouth, nor Cyprus, nor Malta, nor Hong Kong, nor Singapore.........She did not enjoy the life of a Naval Officer's wife...but she ended up all alone.... renting a bedsitter in Notting Hill...and grumbling about her fate to anyone who would listen to her woes...

Aren't you allowed to throw pans at babysitters?

 

[Chicken Curry]

What is the point of this thread ?

 

[silviaic]

What is the point of this thread ?

I think there is no much point, and its use is subjective. You can use it to learn french, or to discuss philosophy, or human nature, or even to talk about women. It fits everyone. That's why I thought It would fit me to have a little fun,
May be given your name you can use it to pass on some nice recipe. I have friends for dinner on Saturday.

Silvia.
by the way, the original thread intention was to see if there is a way to weight contributions as a function of the experience of who is posting. I gave my opinion on that to timsk, and I think the outcome of a tip it's the tip-taker responsibility, not the tipster.

 

[SOCRATES]

Men can also be teachers, students, friends, coworkers, counselors, etc..

JO

Hello JumpOff, I agree with you absolutely.

But you see, men are never given a proper chance to look into womens' minds in a properly structured manner, therefore the great majority end up mystified, as the outcomes they expect are not the ones they expect.

But they are the unwitting architects of their own mystification.

This is because they think women think like men, which of course women do not.

My focus was not on the relationship that can exist between men and women from the angle that you approach it in your post.

My focus was on how women view men as potential mates, and the unspoken method of selection women naturally apply when they meet a man and assess him, even subconsciously, to determine acceptance or rejection, or to define potentiality either as "friend", "provider" or "sexual partner".

You are a woman, so you know what women mean by "a real man" versus "a wimp".

This mechanism of selection, and what triggers the ultimate responses is unknown or unrealised to the great majority of men, who are at a loss to understand why women respond in the way they do to given scenarios, as these responses frequently utterly defy masculine logic.

Masculine logic does not apply. What does apply is a different perspective and way of being that the majority of men do not innately possess for cultural and social reasons. Therefore these skills are acquired skills that the majority of men do not view as necessary. Therefore they do not strive to acquire them as they persuade themselves the excercise is not neccessary. Hence the confusion.

 

[SOCRATES]

Aren't you allowed to throw pans at babysitters?

Yes, I suppose under certain circumstances it can be a tempting proposition.

Be mindful that the babysitter might be very orientated towards culinary interests.

In that event it would be prudent to attach a rubber band to the handle, so that the pan comes back, like a sort of gentle boomerang, if there is risk that the babysitter could walk away with an expensive item of kitchen equipment. Some of these items are very pricey.

But the rubber band ought not to have excess elasticity, otherwise there is risk that the thrower can knock her own self out on the rebound. Klonk ! :cheesy:

 

[SOCRATES]

What is the point of this thread ?

Once totally mastered, trading is very repetitive and mundane and loses the intellectual challenge and the excitement it had when you started.

For this reason, and also because trading is a lonely business, many of us get together here to discuss, and to chat.

Not all of these discussions develop with a focus exclusively on punching buttons and making a shower of points, you know, room must be made available to wander off to topics of common interest otherwise not touched.

This is both a relief and an amusment to us all, or at least to some of us, in an otherwise self imposed isolated environment, you see or not see ?

 

[dc2000]

What has the last 10 pages of this thread got to do with the original post ?

And as the latest postings are not anything vaguely related to "General Trading Chat" why has it not been moved to the Foyer?