Speaking of hershey... He is quite similar to "scientists" presented in "Fashionable Nonsense: Postmodern Intellectuals' Abuse of Science" by Alan Sokal. You can also find an explanation of creating such a BS in "Fooled by Randomness" by N. Taleb, chapter "Monte Carlo, Nonsense, and the Scientific Intellectual". And here are some pictures, if you don't have time to read books. You will get the idea in 2 seconds! http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=305078 http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=305202 http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=305223 http://harrytrader.membres.jexiste.org/top_retracement.gif http://harrytrader.membres.jexiste.org/market/images/dji_230503_for_270503b.gif http://harrytrader.membres.jexiste.org/market/images/reality_check.gif http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=303408
Very well said! While I have long realized that ET members aren't exactly appreciative of people they cannot understand or cannot explain how they can write such big posts - I have learned to get over it and see the ET board for what it really is : A treasure full of great information - In form of discussions, facts, polls, statistics - You name it it's a great thing. Also, I have met some fantastic like-minded people on this board who I am now communicating with privately. So, it is a great networking tool, too. All this said, I think we should respect Jack Hershey for all the posts he has made and the value he has contributed. He is an asset to ET in that he has given us lots of things to think about and a lot of personal experience. I'm not saying that I believe any of his "300% of daily range" performance claims - However, that makes no difference. People who discredit somebody's information just because they didn't like something that person said are simply insecure, and bound to miss out on a lot of great information in their life. Self-conscious and secure people aren't disturbed by individuals' little weak spots. They overlook them and take them for the true value they can deliver. And everybody can deliver something of value. By recognizing this - the simple fact that we can learn something from everybody - The world will become your oyster. All this said, I think we should respect Jack Hershey, not only for the fact that he is just human, too, but also for all the great information he has contributed to this board. I have greatly enjoyed a great many of his posts and learned a lot of valuable things from them - And still do. Of course all under the protection of self-evaluation. I take it in, evaluate it, use what's useful and throw the rest away. That's what everybody trying to learn should do. Regarding the argument that people can't understand what he's talking about - Stop trading for godsake. If you don't get the stuff he's talking about - with all due respect - you're merely beginners. Read some in-depth trading books and study this 'till it comes out your ears - You will get the hang of it eventually. I hardly have any problems with his posts, why should you? When it comes down to it, looking at all the rubbish being written on ET everyday, Jack Hershey is one of the most interesting, insightful and oftentimes funny contributors on the board. For once, we should put our guns down, and give him the due respect any regular and constructive ET member deserves. At the end of the day, we're all brothers just trying to do the same thing. It is a matter of respect. Give him the respect he deserves, or don't expect to get any yourself. All the Best and Compliments, ~The Scientist
Ive given jack/bubba a hard time but honestly when he takes the time to actually pay attention to what he is writing he is pretty good reading....I think he has random thoughts in the middle of sentences and omits words here and there and it gets muddled....but when he uses spell check and re reads his posts he's actually pretty good.....a hershey example: WHAT JACK SAID: " we have a break out occurring right now if you look at the, Peanut butter and jelly is the source for the indications on the money flow of the three streams, but i need coffee to better, ok your flying the plane but there is nobody on board buddy" WHAT JACK MEANT: " NASDAQ is breaking out and i need a sandwich because my sugar level is low, I think mr. market is a fraud and if i had hot coffee i'd throw it in TM_Direct's face"
I too can say things most people will not understand. Does that mean that they are beginners? Perhaps, but first of all it means that I cannot communicate properly at their level. I have spent many years in the academia and I am really appaled by Jack's pretentious jerking around using terms that do not hold water after a closer scrutiny. If you cannot explain things so that you are understood that's your failure and not those who cannot grasp your bogus brilliance. DT-Waw is absolutely right in his analogy to Sokal's hoax.
You are right here in a few points, however I think the reference to Sokal's hoax is a little far-fetched and nothing but a potential witness of your own inability to discern and filter valuable knowledge from hoax / bogus information. And yes - I, too have criticized bubba and told him not to use so many abbreviations and far-streched / widely unused terms as he does - See "scalping" thread amongst others. And yes - I also have told him that his stance and conclusions are arrogant sometimes (see "trading inversely" thread), besides many other anti-posts and "bullshit" agreements to other's anti-posts. I think I have given him a good deal of shit altogether. And I think this is enough. Yes, you are also partly right about the "pretentious jerking around using terms that do not hold water..." - BUT: Still the old thing applies, which I described in my previous post here: This is what it's all about. The "protection of self-evaluation". What we really need in order to learn is an applicable set of filters to discern bogus from valuable knowledge. And since every source, no matter how credible, has some elements of bogus / bias in it, we really have to foster the development of these filters. The way to do this is by constant education. If we've read 3+m of trading books (Victor Sperandeo has 2,000+ trading books!), plus read thousands of ET posts, plus had a bit of our own live market exposure, plus our own experiences developing and training/tweaking trading systems - Then chances are your "bogus filters" are pretty well developed. Once these filters are developed, we i.e. laugh about trading education sites etc whose every word and claim we would have believed 5 years ago... etc etc etc. This applies to anything in life. The only way to acquire comprehensive and non-misleading knowledge is by putting in boatloads of hard work and study - That's just the way it is. All this said, once these filters are developed well, we should use them to their full potential, to graze every bit of information out there. Now that the filters are effective, we can read thousands of ET posts, articles, books etc and pick up those little gems of knowledge here and there. This is what I really meant with "take it in, evaluate it and take what's useful, throw the rest away..." It's a continuous "data-mining" process. To discuss how much of what Jack says is nonsense, "doesn't hold water" and so on bla bla - Is a complete waste of time! You people, and particularly the "critics" should seriously stop wasting your time criticizing others and instead focusing on datamining, to find the few bits of value they have to deliver. You'll be way ahead of the crowd. As I already mentioned, it doesn't matter who you're listening to. There's a little bit of value in anybody's speech. Even in the speeches of Saddam Hussein, Benito Mussolini, Adolf Hitler, George Bush etc there are interesting bits of information and elements of truth to be found. To completely discredit somebody's every future word for particular actions, statements etc not only discredits the freedom of speech and opinion, it also discredits that individuals' ability to learn, evolve and change his mind, which is something we all go through, even Jack Hershey in his late 70's. Even well-remembered ET members like FPC (god bless him) had something funny or of value to add every so often. This is why I don't use the "ignore" feature at all. But let me say this much to your (critics) very credit: If you've realized that a lot of Jack's stuff is bogus - You're already halfway there in the process towards becoming a successful dataminer. You have recognized the bogus. The next step in your evolution will be to sort out the bogus effortlessly and without time-delay, until you can effectively find the gems in anything you read. Once you have achieved this, you will be well ahead of a crowd of sceptics that makes up for about 99% of the population. Trust me - You may all feel very smart being sceptics - But there's a step ahead of being a sceptic. And that's being an information / value scavenger. Think about it. It's the next step to intellectual evolution... All the Best, ~Scientist
LOL TM! You never fail to make me laugh my head off another time... Now I'm just keenly awaiting your first "bubba" photomontage... Who's he gonna look like? Louis Armstrong? John Rhys-Davies? The old Einstein? The old Elvis??? Well, I even dedicated you a line on the "various books of ET members" thread... ~Scientist