Seems like it is pretty tough to get recs around here unless you drink the BRK/Fool.com Kool-Aid. It goes to show that there is no value placed on opposing viewpoints here, and that is unfortunate. Please, don't rec this post.TAF
Why do you care? If you write a good post, and you know it's good, you don't need us to validate it.
Dear TheAngryFerret,Don't take the recs too seriously. If you do, you may find yourself annoyed on occasion; one post of yours you think is "deserving" may end up less rec'd than another "undeserving" post by someone else.FWIW, I think that people on this board are neither super stingy nor super generous with recs. You can definitely get a well-rec'd post by say doing a piece of analysis on Company XYZ. It may be easier/less work to get a well-rec'd post by comparing the corruption in Company ABC vs. the integrity of Berkshire Hathaway/Buffett etc.; I feel there are "emotional" recs if you can capture the board mood. You can actually be pretty well rec'd if you go against BH/Buffett etc., as long as the post is well written; I think that folks on this board appreciate opposing opinions as well (not completely cult-like!) If you really want recs, make an "emotional" post of some sort, then say something like "rec me if you agree with this". I don't know how well it works now with daily rec limits, but there is "Gimme My Recs", which at one time was a great way to build up your rec resume. "Popularity" does seem to help; I can't prove it, but I suspect if you are one of the regulars, you get more reads on your posts and are thus more likely to be rec'd.I'm certainly not the most rec'd person here, but I get a reasonable number. And I don't think that most would say I'm a "party line" kind of guy, in fact I think I'm almost getting a "curmudgeon" label on me. So you can do alright on this board with opposing views...Best,Lleweilun Smith
<Please, don't rec this post.TAF>Not much danger of that.
"Why do you care? If you write a good post, and you know it's good, you don't need us to validate it."This is such an important point, I wanted to quote it and respond. I would rather have 3 people who I greatly respect rec one of my posts for good reason than to get 50 recs for something I consider pointless (such as empty cheerleading for Berkshire). Many times I've posted things where I knew it wouldn't get a lot of recs simply because I wanted to have my post planted there for all time.A previous thread talked about going back and reading stuff from the past. That's something I do fairly often on message boards. I'll often go back to posts from years ago and read what people said back then. I frequently find posts which didn't receive a lot of recommendations, yet were amazingly accurate. Other posts are heaped with recs but became humorously wrong with time.When I stumble on my own posts from years ago, it's important to me that I'm able to say that I offered something valuable, rather than smacking my forehead saying, "I can't believe I wrote that garbage."DeliLama
Seems like it is pretty tough to get recs around here unless you drink the BRK/Fool.com Kool-Aid. It goes to show that there is no value placed on opposing viewpoints here, and that is unfortunate.If "recs" are really that necessary for you to maintain your self-esteem, then that's just sad.
Why do you care? If you write a good post, and you know it's good, you don't need us to validate it. ----Reminds me of Steven Jobs in a Fortune interview saying that he only took US$ 1 as compensation in Apple because he didn't need money to validate his intelligence...Since them he changed his view a bit, what may indicate either a shift in his view, or in his intelligence for that matter... :)Actually, Apple would not have survived without him, so I wouldn't bother that much...But I agree... recs are not a good indication of a good post...-< Christian Bojlesen >-
Reminds me of Steven Jobs in a Fortune interview saying that he only took US$ 1 as compensation in Apple because he didn't need money to validate his intelligence...Maybe so, but he later backed up the truck when it came to compensation. Name Fiscal All Other Principal Position Year Salary ($) Bonus ($) Options (#) Compensation ($) Steven P. Jobs 2001 $1 $43,511,534 (2) (3) $40,484,594 (2)Chief Executive Officer 2000 $1 $0 20,000,000 $0 1999 $1 $0 0 $0 1998 $1 $0 0 $0 1997 $0 $0 30,000 (1) $0 (1) Mr. Jobs was granted 30,000 stock options in his capacity as a director of the Company pursuant to the Director Plan.(2) In December 1999, Mr. Jobs was given a special executive bonus for serving as the Company's interim Chief Executive Officer for past services, in the form of an aircraft with a total cost to the Company of approximately $90,000,000. This amount was previously reported as a bonus for fiscal year 2000 in the Company's 2000 Form 10-K and 2000 Proxy Statement. Because the aircraft was transferred to Mr. Jobs in 2001, the amount of approximately $43.5 million paid by the Company during fiscal year 2001 towards the purchase of the plane and related tax assistance of approximately $40.5 million was reported as income to Mr. Jobs. Accordingly, the $90 million previously reported as a bonus in 2000 has been removed from the table above, and the amount reported as taxable income by Mr. Jobs related to the aircraft during fiscal year 2001 is reported as compensation.(3) Subsequent to fiscal year 2001, in October 2001 the Board granted Mr. Jobs options to purchase 7,500,000 shares of Common Stock under the 1998 Plan at an exercise price per share of $18.30, which equaled the fair market value based on the closing market value of Common Stock on the date of grant. 25% of the options were vested as of the date of grant and the remainder vest in three equal annual installments commencing on the first anniversary of the date of grant.
Name Fiscal All Other Principal Position Year Salary ($) Bonus ($) Options (#) Compensation ($) Steven P. Jobs 2001 $1 $43,511,534 (2) (3) $40,484,594 (2)Chief Executive Officer 2000 $1 $0 20,000,000 $0 1999 $1 $0 0 $0 1998 $1 $0 0 $0 1997 $0 $0 30,000 (1) $0
TheAngryFerret writes:Seems like it is pretty tough to get recs around here unless you drink the BRK/Fool.com Kool-Aid. It goes to show that there is no value placed on opposing viewpoints here, and that is unfortunate. There is sense and nonsense in the above comment. Yes, sometimes I find the Fool to be a self-absorbed cargo cult where many repeat the old saws handed down from a few. The "rec meter" reflects that, and although it does add some value, I feel it also contributes to intellectual inbreeding. People cultivate a taste for what they like to read, and then they learn who writes what they like to read, and then they read those writers (while p-boxing the rest). However I do not understand how you put BRK and the fool.com in the same bucket of "Kool-Aid." There are a lot worse cults one could join than the pure value approach of BRK. On the other hand, Fool.com talks one game of personal financial empowerment, but plays another game of painting themselves as stock experts (although I notice their famous portfolio updates have not been published on the home page for some time). Like any online community you just have to learn to separate the signal from the noise.
TAF:If I understand correctly, you a) don't feel loved because no one agrees with you, b) believe that opposing views are not tolerated and anyone who disagrees with the group gets P-boxed.For the first point, I would refer you to Thoreau who said "One man and God constitute a majority". Visionaries are often considered heretics by their contemporaries. If you believe in yourself, that should be sufficient. If I may use myself as an example, my most rec'd post ever was a cheap shot at TMF. I cranked it out in 13 seconds, and today consider it an embarassment. http://boards.fool.com/Message.asp?mid=17102353 On the other hand, posts I consider incredibly useful often get 0 recs. As they say, you can take a horse to water...As for the second point, I hope that the fact I took you out of my P-box long enough to respond to you will satisfy you that this is not the case. I doubt this, of course, but hope springs eternal. People who get P-boxed tend to have been overly rude/inane for extended periods. Equating BRK to the Jonestown massacre is just so insulting that frankly, I can't imagine I will ever be able to respect your opinion about anything.Very few people enjoy disagreement. Humans, for better or worse, are social creatures. We like to be in a group. However we have learned that herds can be driven off cliffs, so we tolerate some level of dispute, provided it is done in a cordial manner. As an example, I submit gdefelice. He and I regularly take the exact same information and come to exactly opposite conclusions. The same day he made his award-winning post that the bubble has a long way to go, I moved 1/2 of my cash into SPY making it my single largest holding. And yet, I value what he says. When I read his posts, I force myself to understand how he has reached his conclusion, what I think is wrong, and why. If I can't do that, I don't know the issues well enough.Finally, everyone has an agenda. Some people want to establish a track record and be respected, some want a sounding board to test ideas, some want to tout hoping to make a quick profit, some just want a soapbox where they can draw attention. What is your agenda? In my view your posts are, in the words of The Bard, "a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing". Is this how you hoped to be viewed? How something is done can be as important as what is done. Give consideration to your reputation. What do you want to be famous for? Then be that thing. See your future. Be your future.
I don't read posts that are that long. I hope it was nice.
I don't read posts that are that long. I hope it was nice.Why not? Does it take too long to look up all the big words?
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |