Author Topic: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT  (Read 3752 times)

LC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2884
Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
« Reply #20 on: January 10, 2019, 10:33:14 PM »
Dude what the *$#$? Trying to pick up a 16 year old at Exeter Academy as a 30 year old?

I don't know what "more to the story" there can be. Who picks up high school girls as a freaking adult? And Eric, keep your crappy behavior outside of the 914 area code.

Anyways - was interesting to hear you speak, Spek. Funny how Eric could not pronounce the name....it is a typical latin pronunciation. But you were the star of the show and more importantly, knew your stuff - well performed!
« Last Edit: January 10, 2019, 10:44:11 PM by LC »
"Lethargy bordering on sloth remains the cornerstone of our investment style."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
brk.b | cash


LC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2884
Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
« Reply #21 on: January 10, 2019, 10:52:14 PM »
Holy cow. Too much brain damage to me, outta here!
« Last Edit: January 11, 2019, 07:24:45 AM by LC »
"Lethargy bordering on sloth remains the cornerstone of our investment style."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
brk.b | cash

KJP

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 762
Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
« Reply #22 on: January 11, 2019, 05:22:34 AM »
Well, Spekulatius,

to me, you're not [in any way] related to this.

In short, it's about double indentity here on CoBF.

Please explain yourself, Og, here.

Explain what?  That he's using a pseudonym on an anonymous message board?

So, is this a meeting place or a community?
Transactional or relational?
Anonymity is a double-edged sword which comes with its own sense of responsibility.
For me, an investment is a partnership and maybe that's too personal.

Why does it have to be the same for everyone?  What prevents "relational" interactions among some and "transactional" interactions among others on the same message board (or, for that matter, the same workplace or city block)?

writser

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1670
Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
« Reply #23 on: January 11, 2019, 08:23:41 AM »
Imho the board is fine the way it is. I couldn't care less whether John or Eric or Cigarbutt is your real name or not and if you opened another account or not. Report posts/posters you think are inappropriate and let Parsad do his job. No need for John or others to police the forum by their own moral standards. Frankly I'd have preferred it if this thread didn't exist - I'd rather have everybody disclosing as much about their personal lives as they are comfortable with themselves. I am here mainly to make money rather than friends. But I guess that's not true for all.
« Last Edit: January 11, 2019, 08:37:00 AM by writser »
When you are dead, you do not know you are dead. It's only painful and difficult for others. The same applies when you are stupid.

Liberty

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10517
  • twitter.com/libertyRPF
    • twitter.com/libertyRPF
Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
« Reply #24 on: January 11, 2019, 09:42:46 AM »
There's a big difference between anonymous and pseudonymous. If you keep the same alias for years, people get to know you just as much as if you were using a "real name". A lot of the best accounts here and on Twitter are pseudonymous, but we know who they are because we've been following them for years, even if we don't know their real names.
"Most haystacks don't even have a needle." |  I'm on Twitter  | The importance of saying 'oops'

CGJB

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
« Reply #25 on: January 11, 2019, 02:32:13 PM »
Good grief, talk about hijacking a thread.

There's nothing wrong with Og posting that he'd interviewed a member of this board for his podcast. The fact that the person interviewed is a member of this board makes it relevant to the board.

I can't see why it's a big deal that a member of this board used to post under his real name, then decided to post under a made-up name -- especially since the vast majority of board members use made-up names. Is that against the rules or guidelines set by Parsad for posting on this board? If not, there's no issue here. Certainly no reason to start questioning the person's "integrity."

And I bet there's plenty more to the story than what the linked news article reported. But that's neither here nor there, especially since it's a settled matter legally. I wish Parsad would delete everything in this thread except Og's original posting, then only allow comments pertaining to the interview.

Gregmal

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1241
Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
« Reply #26 on: January 11, 2019, 02:43:15 PM »
Good grief, talk about hijacking a thread.

There's nothing wrong with Og posting that he'd interviewed a member of this board for his podcast. The fact that the person interviewed is a member of this board makes it relevant to the board.

I can't see why it's a big deal that a member of this board used to post under his real name, then decided to post under a made-up name -- especially since the vast majority of board members use made-up names. Is that against the rules or guidelines set by Parsad for posting on this board? If not, there's no issue here. Certainly no reason to start questioning the person's "integrity."

And I bet there's plenty more to the story than what the linked news article reported. But that's neither here nor there, especially since it's a settled matter legally. I wish Parsad would delete everything in this thread except Og's original posting, then only allow comments pertaining to the interview.

Welcome to COBF. This stuff happens all the time. It's head scratching. So many self proclaimed "investors" regularly get hung up on totally irrelevant details, fabricate issues, and almost always look for excuses to miss the forest for the trees.

LC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2884
Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
« Reply #27 on: January 11, 2019, 03:14:53 PM »
Partially correct.

Motives are important.

Imagine this: someone posts a stock idea. Now as an investor, you will never know 100% of the details regarding how to value this stock. You know what the financials tell you, what your due diligence tells you, etc. but you will never have a full picture.

Now, what if you find this person is a paid promoter for the company? Wouldn't you want to know this? Wouldn't you want to understand the biases and incentives underlying a stock pitch? This is why disclosure statements exist.

Liberty makes a good point. Despite anonymous names, we all build up some social cache here on this message board. Or at the very least, over time people understand our biases and incentives.

Of course content matters, but so does context. You need both.
"Lethargy bordering on sloth remains the cornerstone of our investment style."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
brk.b | cash

writser

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1670
Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
« Reply #28 on: January 11, 2019, 03:54:07 PM »
Your point being? Posters are not allowed to create a new account because then you lose the context to say “get the fuck out of my area code you pervert” when they post a podcast? I’d say that is actually a great reason to argue for the opposite.

This is an anonymous board. If somebody with 5 posts pitches a stock: be skeptical. If somebody with 500 posts pitches a stock: be skeptical. If somebody with 5000 posts pitches a stock: be super skeptical.
« Last Edit: January 11, 2019, 04:09:04 PM by writser »
When you are dead, you do not know you are dead. It's only painful and difficult for others. The same applies when you are stupid.

Gregmal

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1241
Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
« Reply #29 on: January 11, 2019, 03:56:51 PM »
Partially correct.

Motives are important.

Imagine this: someone posts a stock idea. Now as an investor, you will never know 100% of the details regarding how to value this stock. You know what the financials tell you, what your due diligence tells you, etc. but you will never have a full picture.

Now, what if you find this person is a paid promoter for the company? Wouldn't you want to know this? Wouldn't you want to understand the biases and incentives underlying a stock pitch? This is why disclosure statements exist.

If I was lazy and didn't want to be thorough with my due diligence? Sure. But in that case I'd be better off buying an index fund.

If I'm willing to do the work and do my own deep dive, it is entirely irrelevant.