I will dignify Andrews response as absolutely commendable.
When I tried to give Andrew another thumbs up it politely told me I had to spread some reputation around to others before giving points to Andrew again.
At first I didn't really like Andrew, and was thinking it was good when he left us. Then I suddenly realized I was very sad, he left us. I was overjoyed when he returned.
I have been thinking alot about Andrew and his posts the last week.
I have come to admire and respect him. I appreciate the lessons he is politely teaching me, not just about GJ.
He is sensitive (much more than I), kind, considerate and always seems to take the time to help those newbies in need by explaining basic concepts
in a patient and very easy to understand way.
Isn't life funny? I started out dislikeing Andrew but now I hold him high on a pedastal and admire his attributes, which I have previously pointed out.
So I have identified those excellent attributes in Andrew and have set a goal to be more like him in those areas.
I am so very thankful to have Andrews participation here, And I have a great deal to learn from his example. He demonstrates numerous fiine qualities and he leads by example.
In case I missed any attributes. I see him (andrew) as kind, considerate, pateint, generous (especailly in the sharing of his heart which is invaluable to me at least), and even merciful! You say how did he have mercy?
He had mercy on forexed and treated him with human dignity despite his
inconsideration. Andrew is obviously an excellent communicator through his writing and I am certain Andrew could have (done the wrong thing)
and ripped forexed a new one and made an utter fool out of him,
BUT instead he still treated him with human dignity, INSTEAD of responding to some pathetic speech with more of the same.
My hat is off to Andrew and I am now even more thankful to have him with us as a contributor to our thread.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrewunknown
Posting an article to elicit an anticipated response so you can then berate the individual(s) responding serves no constructive purpose - it only further proves what you felt you had adequate evidence to know beforehand; otherwise you wouldn't have posted initially. At best, that's redundant, and therefore purposeless.
Anyone reading this thread knows I do not trade this method and that I take issue or voice disagreement/divergence of opinion regularly. This kind of thing can be done with respect and with concern for defending and promoting a balanced, rational and wide-open approach to trading this pair.
Petty and condescending remarks are an old, tired thing in forums, so it's no surprise to see someone (a trader? Or just someone gawking?) finally come along to fulfill the bit role of rude antagonist. Do I disagree with categorical denunciations and counter-claims not corroborated by concrete data? Sure; but the bluster may arise more from lack of knowledge than arrogance. In any case, being rude about it is of no help.
And all of this "what? 500?" pissing contest-type bravado and repetitive solicitation of "the figure" begs the question: from which highly capitalized pedestal do you deign to consort with $500 account holders? And how do you trade? Regale us with wonders....
"The subject", really, is this method and derivatively the positive carry on Guppy, not the position of an analyst at UBS with which rrram might have a difference of opinion or your subjective notion of the quality of his response to it. If you disagree or find fault with the proponents of this method or the method itself, say why with the intent of educating or furthering mutual understanding.
|