Skip to main content
No. of Recommendations: 11
[Whoops -- I clicked "submit" prematurely on that last post. Perhaps it will be yanked, to prevent confusion or redundancy. Here's what I posted, along with the conclusion of my post.]

Trick --

<<I agree with this. I heard the "full service broker" arguments from the beginning. But I, along with so many others here, heard a general mistrust of most mutual funds, as well as the majority of paid financial advice out there. I am not alone in picking up on a general mistrust of financial advisors in general. >>

No, you're not. I can see where you get that, and even that someone might have interpreted us as implying that any professional advice is bad. Still, I don't think that's strictly what we said or meant. With mutual funds, sure -- we pointed out that they shouldn't be blindly trusted. That there are many problems with many of them that the average person isn't aware of: overdiversification, size, underperformance, churning, excessive fees, etc. I think that in many cases we were simply playing the role of the traditional Fool -- telling the truth, and exposing some things worth exposing.

<< Again, it's possible I misunderstood your true intention, but I must add, I have above average comprehension skills. I suggest it was your general tone that caused any trouble, and it's biting you now that you are paddling in a boat with so many others.>>

Of course you have above average comprehension skills. Perhaps our tone hasn't always been pitch-perfect. I myself wish we hadn't sometimes seemed like Wise vs. Fool was a black and while distinction, sometimes seeming to portray ALL of the Wise as bad. I know we haven't done all things perfectly.

You said in another post:

<<In my opinion, you are once again retreating into your oft-used "Trust us, we are the good guys" routine. As I said, I know you are the good guys. But I also think there are good guys around who don't like the way they look in Jester Caps. >>

I really don't see this. When Bogey and I responded to you, you thought we were saying we we're the good guys, trust us?? I thought we were just responding to your post, presenting our perspective, refuting as best as we could some of your statements that struck as wrong or problematic.

Finally, in yet another post, you said:

<<For those interested, here is a long meaty post as balanced as anything I've seen here in a long while. The fact that is written by one of the "insiders" in the financial advisor field is interesting, and that this writer is an occasional vocal critic of some of the writing at TMF makes it more so. I think it is balanced and informative. Enjoy.

http://fireboards.fool.com/Message.asp?mid=15208802>>

That's fine, and the post certainly has its merits. But FWIW, I think this writer is more than an "occasional critic of some of the writing at TMF." For almost as long as I can remember, he's been absolutely disgusted with us. And even downright mean-spirited, too: http://fireboards.fool.com/Message.asp?mid=15137821

I know that this playful derision delights his friends, but it hasn't delighted me, and I hope you'll forgive me if I'm not eager to read his words.

Selena

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 7
Even if I don't always agree with him, nedludd is a man after my own heart. While he is far too holier than thou about the virtues of analysts and brokers, he doesn't pull his punches, and in the sometimes overly civil and overly peaceful world of TMF, someone who will call a spade a spade is a breath of fresh air.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5
"And even downright mean-spirited, too"


If I may throw in my ½¢ here real quick...

I think I've got to go along with Selena on this...

a check of the author in questions' profile & interview reveals a cynicism reflective of someone who doesn't really give a damn about anyone, other than perhaps himself...

I think the biggest clue is when a person is a "Favorite Fool" of some, or many, yet claims no one in kind.


thanksimouttaherelizard
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 9
FWIW, I wasn't defending or promoting NedLudd, he doesn't need me for that. I liked what he wrote in this piece, however, and thought I would share the link.

Rick
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
and in the sometimes overly civil and overly peaceful world of TMF, someone who will call a spade a spade is a breath of fresh air.

What boards do you post on? Do you subscribe to UMF (Utopian Motley Fool) instead of TMF?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5
What I meant by that is that the Fool censors are overzealous and inconsistent in their post pulling practices, and that we have too many posters who pull their punches for fear of either getting posts yanked and maybe their posting privileges suspended, or who are afraid to tell it like it is for fear of getting flamed. I by no means am advocating all out flame wars, as nothing will drive away good posters faster, but to have stimulating, informative and enjoyable discussions on these boards, posters have to be able to and have the guts to, within reason, say what they think and call a spade a spade.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5
For almost as long as I can remember, he's been absolutely disgusted with us

....

I know that this playful derision delights his friends, but it hasn't delighted me, and I hope you'll forgive me if I'm not eager to read his words.


FWIW, I get a lot more out of ned's words than I get out of the official Fool editorial material. Maybe there is a lesson to be learned here.

--Mike
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
If I may throw in my ½¢ here real quick...

I think I've got to go along with Selena on this...

a check of the author in questions' profile & interview reveals a cynicism reflective of someone who doesn't really give a damn about anyone, other than perhaps himself...

I think the biggest clue is when a person is a "Favorite Fool" of some, or many, yet claims no one in kind.


Talk about a deep, thorough analysis...

--Mike
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
Talk about a deep, thorough analysis...

Sometimes the simple things can reveal a lot about a person.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 6
Sometimes the simple things can reveal a lot about a person.

You mean simple things like not selecting "Favorite Fools". It could be that he doesn't believe in the feature.

IF
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 12
I think the biggest clue is when a person is a "Favorite Fool" of some, or many, yet claims no one in kind.

Talk about a deep, thorough analysis...

Sometimes the simple things can reveal a lot about a person.


And sometimes not...

http://boards.fool.com/Profile.asp?uid=31992

Albaby

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 8
Sometimes the simple things can reveal a lot about a person.

Try reading the post that Trick referenced. That, IMHO, tells much more.

--Mike
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
"Talk about a deep, thorough analysis...

--Mike
"



And just what were you expecting from a lizard, Mike Easter?

(anyway related to Ben Dover?)





Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
"I think the biggest clue is when a person is a "Favorite Fool" of some, or many, yet claims no one in kind."
"Talk about a deep, thorough analysis..."


Or, an indication of what someone finds important.

The only control a person has over Favorite Fools or recs is to doppelize. (I'm ignoring the gimme boards; for those who like that sort of thing, that's the sort of thing they like.)

All the poster knows is that Ned hasn't chosen to use the FF feature. Period. Unless the poster's asked Ned about this, and gotten a reply, the poster knows as much about Ned's rationale as about Hamlet's preference in footwear.


Print the post Back To Top