real cynical on the whole situation is that the hottest, most dangerous, highest creditRiskBearing entities, namely hedge funds, now are threatened to loose money by bancruptcy of a listed intermediary ... people will rush into the open arms of investment bank's i am afraid ... do not know what to think about. tend to think competition will be reduced and service will lack. ... hmm...
I think thewoodcutter's actions are unfair and unethical. I asked the question, as to why EliteTrader helped Refco to mislead us about Refco account security, because I was arguing for a re-examination of EliteTrader censorship policies, which unintentionally benefit frauddoers. These policies give excessive latitude to those who make postings misusing EliteTrader to promote fraudulent schemes. If somebody tries to make postings exposing the deception, leading to a dispute with the frauddoers, then ET policy, it seems, is to delete postings and to close threads indiscriminately, without regard to the value of discussions exposing fraud. This unintentionally empowers frauddoers to disrupt any discussion unfavorable to their interests. I sought a more carefully crafted censorship policy, one which favors scrutiny of frauddoers, rather than unintentionally assisting frauddoers to evade scrutiny. Thewoodcutter refuses to accept this interpretation of my words, which I intended, and which I already explained. Thewoodcutter instead insists on attributing to me an accusation that EliteTrader conspired with frauddoers. Perhaps thewoodcutter is just too pig-headed and arrogant to admit that there was a misunderstanding. I think, regardless of his motives, that thewoodcutter's behaviour is not only unethical, it is unfair to both myself and to EliteTrader.
Seems it's about time for you to call in your Dad (Rocky) and Angel. If not mistaken the "real" Jim Rockford always got the crap beat out of him in the 70's. and relied on those two guys. Do you suffer from OCD regarding Refco?
I was just going to respond with "cuckoo, cuckoo, cuckoo" but then I thought; "hang on a second, nobody who can use a computer is this stupid - this is a bloody wind up!!!!" absolute quality you had me hook, line and sinker, well done mate. I particularly liked the bit about "regardless of his motives" - nice play on the conspiracy theory angle! Oh and the bit about being "too pig headed and arrogant to admit that there was a misunderstanding" - I loved it, that really invited the "polish your own mirror" response. Once again top wind up.
First of all, thewoodcutter has a habit of misrepresenting my postings. Thewoodcutter, in this case, stated that I was unwilling to discuss the how and the why of the loss, by Jim Rogers clients, of hundreds of millions of dollars deposited in segregated futures trading accounts at Refco. The fact is that I did state that I am willing to discuss it. I said, in a previous posting, directly addressed to thewoodcutter: Second of all, I will try to clarify my comment about the how and why of the disappearing funds. I am certainly open to seeing other viewpoints, but so far, I haven't seen any explanation having any relevance to the argument I have been making. I have been making the argument that it would not be prudent to deposit funds with a broker, if there is evidence that the broker MIGHT be more likely than other brokers to embezzle the funds. The uncertainty, as to the HOW and WHY of the disappearing Jim Rogers money, does not weaken my argument. Third of all, the woodcutter says there is no point in my repeatedly making postings restating my view. Here is the point in my doing so. Thewoodcutter and Apex Capital have repeatedly made postings misrepresenting my views. It appears that they have misled others to see my views according to those misrepresentations, instead of according to what my views actually are. My point in repeating myself is to counter the repeated misrepresentations by thewoodcutter and Apex Capital. I would prefer that the repeated misrepresentations would stop, so that I could stop denying them, and then we could all focus on a more productive discussion. Fourth of all, thewoodcutter says that he doesn't disagree with my posts about the need to remove funds from Refco. This contradicts the fact that he has decided to leave $150,000 on deposit with Refco. So he does, in fact, disagree with me. I can only hope that these are his own funds, instead of client funds. Are they client funds? Fifth of all, thewoodcutter's explanation, for leaving funds with Refco, is that if it was going to collapse, it would have already done so. I find this reasoning process deficient. I don't think that somebody who makes decisions this way should be permitted to manage client funds. I say once again, I can only hope that he does not.
I don't find WWF the least bit entertaining. I don't find Refco, or other affairs of financial criminals, to be the least bit entertaining. I think financial crime is a very serious matter, one which calls for respect for the damage it does to society and to the lives of its victims. I think that EliteTrader can have much greater value, than that of mere entertainment, if we take EliteTrader seriously, as a tool with which to combat financial crime, especially financial crime directed against traders and their clients. I don't think Apex Capital has a right to interfere with the participation of others in EliteTrader discussions. I think everybody has an equal right to participate. I think Apex Capital's postings have the intent and the result of interfering with those rights. I think that the criticisms I sought to make, of EliteTrader, were justified. I think that my criticisms were repeatedly misrepresented by others. You say that I deserve criticism for making them. I suspect that you are not responding to what I actually said. I suspect that you are responding to the misrepresentation, by others, as to what I said. If you paid attention to what I actually said, then maybe you might agree with me. My only criticisms of Baron have been that he should have been more careful in making decisions to delete postings and to close threads, and that I think his censorship policies should be rethought and more developed. I never accused, or even suspected him, of any intentional wrongdoing. Apex Capital and thewoodcutter have knowingly and repeatedly misrepresented my views on this point. It appears that you were misled by those misrepresentations.
jimrockford: You views about me are both unfair and unethical You continue to misrepresent my views You repeatedly make false accusations about me At no point did i say i had any money at REFCO, it's a simple misunderstanding, if you read it that way then that's because you have different motives There is a flaw in your logic You're all out to get me btw, if i did it (which i don't) have any money at REFCO it would be my $ I can see why you drive apex mad, but I just find you funny.
It appears that thewoodcutter today finally removed the last $150,000 of his funds from Refco. Smart move.
This is quite ironic. It is ironic in that you have no problem making all sorts of UNSUBSTANTIATED claims and allegations against REFCO with no basis in FACT. In fact, your last accusation about where the funds of Jim Rogers were actually held at the time of REFCO's demise is completely unsubstantiated. Even extremely intelligent ET members such as Rufus have not even begun to claim to know where those funds were held at the time of REFCO's troubles. They have prudently reserved judgement on this. But no, not our resident bash artist! For some reason, you cannot even begin to see all of the FALSE CLAIMS that you have made on this thread; ones that are totally unsubstantiated and have NO BASIS IN FACT. And when your unsubstantiated statements are met with criticism by myself and others, you conveniently point out that personal attacks are being made against you. And when moderators or the powers that be at ET have also felt that your claims were libelous and unprofessional in nature, they have appropriately deleted your posts and yet you conveniently cry censorship. It's never about you, is it? It's always about blaming someone else. Dude, you are so incredibly color-blind that you cannot even begin to see how childish you look here. Try opening up Webster's Dictionary and learn what the word unsubstantiated means.