Re: That’s cryptic. - Posted by Jim V
Posted by Jim V on May 23, 2006 at 02:17:20:
Comment wasn’t directed to you, but I could certainly understand if you deemed it offensive. I actually believe you have quite a bit to say that is of value to both newer investors and also those more experienced.
One of the things I don’t care for is “information” that requires you to “crack the code”. If there are thoughts/opinions on a given subject, it makes more sense to me if there is some connection to a possible solution or direction that could be explored.
I also don’t care for “guru” followers that blindly tout their concept of the party line, whether they understand it or not.
So, the comment to the follower wasn’t directed at you, apologies if you found it offensive, it wasn’t meant that way.
My intent was to state my opinion, which I did. I have no interest in doing a flame war with you and I don’t see any point in flaming your cryptic follower.
Is that clarification enough, or do we really need to expand this further?