I Think This Forum Should Stick To Investing

[Mark Leavy]

Do you have a weight problem, pmward?

[pmward]

Do you have a weight problem, pmward?

Not at all. And what does my weight have to do with the discussion?

[Tortoise]

I happened to glance at the OP's (pmward's) user profile just now and noticed that he's been a member since Jan 2019 and managed to stay away from the political threads almost completely until Nov 12 when he posted in the Politics sub-forum for the first time. That was less than three weeks ago.

I wonder why he doesn't just go back to doing what he did prior to Nov 12?

For what it's worth, I've noticed in recent years that most of the forum members who have either permanently left or mentioned thinking about it seem to share a few common characteristics:

- Arrived at the PP and this forum for analytical/quantitative rather than philosophical reasons
- Participate very frequently in VP threads predicated on the supposed ability to time, predict, or generally beat various markets
- Lean politically toward style over substance (e.g., decorum over policy)
- Are vehemently opposed to Trump

[dualstow]

Title says it. I don't think the political stuff belongs here.
...

Hi pm. Quoting post 1, but I've read the bulk of the thread, finally.

I opted out of the Politics section as I agree with almost no one and only peek in once in a while. I have to actively go there, as the posts aren't going to show up in the New Posts section (I think). It's quite peaceful.

With the addition of this new section, we see fewer political comments creeping in, but I like that they're allowed to creep in. I have to invoke the name: you know how heavy-handed Bogleheads' moderation policy is. I couldn't even talk about the minimum wage without getting censored and I eventually asked them to lock me me out after more than a dozen years on that forum.

Whether we have a section or a separate website (honestly, I don't think the latter is going to happen), members are generally allowed to speak freely, within reason. Political comments can creep in . They will creep in whether an attempt is made to relegate them to a section or to an entirely different website. It would take a lot of moderator man-hours to stop it all.

I don't like too much daytrading talk in the pp section, so that eventually gets moved to special threads. Sophie has a no-Trump-references thread going, and it's a pretty cool experiment. I've only edited one post, and haven't really kept up with it.

If you feel you're being abused, either in the threads or in private messages (except private messages from me. YOU WILL READ MY BULLYING AND LIKE IT!*) please get in touch with a moderator.

I think it's fair to say that at least half of the members are freethinking, and many are libertarian, anti-big government, and so on. It's not the Wild West. However, I think it would be ironic if a place so full of people who are used to speaking freely find that they can't, even here.

*

[pmward]

I happened to glance at the OP's (pmward's) user profile just now and noticed that he's been a member since Jan 2019 and managed to stay away from the political threads almost completely until Nov 12 when he posted in the Politics sub-forum for the first time. That was less than three weeks ago.

I wonder why he doesn't just go back to doing what he did prior to Nov 12?

For what it's worth, I've noticed in recent years that most of the forum members who have either permanently left or mentioned thinking about it seem to share a few common characteristics:

- Arrived at the PP and this forum for analytical/quantitative rather than philosophical reasons
- Participate very frequently in VP threads predicated on the supposed ability to time, predict, or generally beat various markets
- Lean politically toward style over substance (e.g., decorum over policy)
- Are vehemently opposed to Trump

The politics section literally was created just a few weeks ago... up until ~Nov 12 I left the forum entirely for 6 months due to the politics getting on my nerves. Obviously, I'm thinking of leaving again.

Are you admitting that this is a forum only for Pro-Trump, non-analytical/quant investors, that do not have a VP? Because the fact that all people that have left or complained supposedly have common characteristics... characteristics you don't have... proves my point exactly. Would those people have left if they felt like this was an open, welcoming, non-hostile environment here?

[pmward]

The people here with PPs who don't like VP investing aren't complaining that there is a VP section. I, for one, simply turned that section off. I don't want to leave because a few folks want to talk about non PP investing.

So why then have so many people left? Why have so many people voted "yes" on my poll? A poll in a section they could choose to ignore? If there is no issue, and everything is just peachy, then why does this topic keep coming up? According to that poll, you have about half the active members that are not really happy here. Do you want us all to just leave?

[sophie]

I think it's fair to say that at least half of the members are freethinking, and many are libertarian, anti-big government, and so on. It's not the Wild West. However, I think it would be ironic if a place so full of people who are used to speaking freely find that they can't, even here.

*

+1000.

Curious how the Democratic party used to be about personal liberty, freedom of choice etc, but now it's about censorship, restrictions on individual liberties, and generally the idea that an "anointed" class exists who has the right to dictate to everyone else what they're allowed to do, say, and think. Which we are now seeing even in the microcosm of this forum. I suppose I shouldn't be so surprised.

[SomeDude]

I think it's fair to say that at least half of the members are freethinking, and many are libertarian, anti-big government, and so on. It's not the Wild West. However, I think it would be ironic if a place so full of people who are used to speaking freely find that they can't, even here.

*

+1000.

Curious how the Democratic party used to be about personal liberty, freedom of choice etc, but now it's about censorship, restrictions on individual liberties, and generally the idea that an "anointed" class exists who has the right to dictate to everyone else what they're allowed to do, say, and think. Which we are now seeing even in the microcosm of this forum. I suppose I shouldn't be so surprised.

The program designed to turn off man's natural free-thinking mind and subordinate him to the group (so he can be ruled) has been incredibly effective, even here in America. I'm pretty sure the millennials will suffer this psychosis worse than all previous generations. I don't know about the one after them but I'm not optimistic.

I think Trump has slowed it by showing you can stand up to the bullies, so more people are. We need to keep going, starting right here lol.

[mukramesh]

The people here with PPs who don't like VP investing aren't complaining that there is a VP section. I, for one, simply turned that section off. I don't want to leave because a few folks want to talk about non PP investing.

So why then have so many people left? Why have so many people voted "yes" on my poll? A poll in a section they could choose to ignore? If there is no issue, and everything is just peachy, then why does this topic keep coming up? According to that poll, you have about half the active members that are not really happy here. Do you want us all to just leave?

It seems obvious to me that the other members of this forum don't really care if people leave and they are addressing it by saying 'your poll is wrong' or 'they're wrong for being offended' (paraphrased).

Moderators/Admin seem to care since they split off the Politics section into a sub-forum. Props to them for doing that.

[doodle]

I think it's fair to say that at least half of the members are freethinking, and many are libertarian, anti-big government, and so on. It's not the Wild West. However, I think it would be ironic if a place so full of people who are used to speaking freely find that they can't, even here.

*

+1000.

Curious how the Democratic party used to be about personal liberty, freedom of choice etc, but now it's about censorship, restrictions on individual liberties, and generally the idea that an "anointed" class exists who has the right to dictate to everyone else what they're allowed to do, say, and think. Which we are now seeing even in the microcosm of this forum. I suppose I shouldn't be so surprised.

The program designed to turn off man's natural free-thinking mind and subordinate him to the group (so he can be ruled) has been incredibly effective, even here in America. I'm pretty sure the millennials will suffer this psychosis worse than all previous generations. I don't know about the one after them but I'm not optimistic.

I think Trump has slowed it by showing you can stand up to the bullies, so more people are. We need to keep going, starting right here lol.

Please watch this Some Dude....


https://youtu.be/LSnAYdQPnOw


I think this is the proper way for a President to deal with issues...heckler, bully's, etc. I don't think Trumps method is right....the drag them out of here, beat em up, jump into the gutter with them. I really admire obama for this...notice how he is calling out his own supporters and admonishing them for attacking a trump supporter. That is how a leader acts.

[dualstow]

I have to agree with doodle on this. It's a bit silly invoking Trump as someone who stands up to bullies...
..or is it?

I can see both sides.
On a personal level, yes, Trump will sue you for attacking him or give harder than he got. It's fair to say he's something of a bully.
In the realm of politics, he doesn't put up with what he perceives as bs. So somedude's point is valid.

[doodle]

I have to agree with doodle on this. It's a bit silly invoking Trump as someone who stands up to bullies...
..or is it?

I can see both sides.
On a personal level, yes, Trump will sue you for attacking him or give harder than he got. It's fair to say he's something of a bully.
In the realm of politics, he doesn't put up with what he perceives as bs. So somedude's point is valid.

I don't have a problem with Trump standing up for what he thinks is right. Hell, I think he's right about many things. It's the style in which he does it that is so detrimental to our nation. He creates a horrible atmosphere in which we can discuss and disagree. He takes things too personally, he's too thin skinned and narcisstic to deal with the abuse that a leader has to deal with. Trump is mean and vindictive to those who don't like him...and that is corrosive. Obama, didn't simply lay down to that heckler....but he dealt with it in a professional manner, with style, and gracefully....he didn't say drag that idiot out of here....back in the day they'd wheel guys like that out on a stretcher...or whatever Trump says.

[Mountaineer]

I agree the forum is being split in two directions and I vote we get rid of the finance and investing talk and focus on the politics. Politics is interesting and dynamically changing while the PP has been the same for 20+ years.

How hard is the permanent portfolio, really? The whole point is that it’s simple and brainless once you have it set up. Do we really need to keep discussing the best gold coin of 2020 to buy?

I come here for the politics and get sucked into reading about gold ETFs and it’s really distracting me from political conversation.

Our beloved Tomfoolery has spoken!

Amusing, as usual.

I also know this is your usual satirical comment. I for one still have tons of questions on specific implementation of various aspects of the Permanent Portfolio.

Vinny

Vinny my interweb friend, you seem to be a very very precise person. Thus my question, exactly how many questions are in a ton, or tonne if you are feeling particularly British at this particular moment ?

You are correct that I can be an extremely precise person. Sometimes maddingly precise for some who have to deal with me in real life. But to better answer your question...once I get back on my Permanent Portfolio journey you shall see in real time!

Vinny

You said tons. Thus my question above. If I just watch your PP reengagement, how will I ever know exactly when you pass from one ton of questions into the second ton? Would you be kind enough to flag the appropriate end to the first ton?

[yankees60]

I have to agree with doodle on this. It's a bit silly invoking Trump as someone who stands up to bullies...
..or is it?

I can see both sides.
On a personal level, yes, Trump will sue you for attacking him or give harder than he got. It's fair to say he's something of a bully.
In the realm of politics, he doesn't put up with what he perceives as bs. So somedude's point is valid.

No two sides to Trump. He is and out and out bully, exhibiting ALL the traits of a bully. One of those traits is that whenever he as gets even a tiny portion back at him that he dishes out with regularity he goes into FULL crybaby mode.

Vinny

[l82start]

in a thread about sticking to investing, the trump bad - politics posting has gotten pretty thick,

what are we protesting about again?

[Mountaineer]

I have to agree with doodle on this. It's a bit silly invoking Trump as someone who stands up to bullies...
..or is it?

I can see both sides.
On a personal level, yes, Trump will sue you for attacking him or give harder than he got. It's fair to say he's something of a bully.
In the realm of politics, he doesn't put up with what he perceives as bs. So somedude's point is valid.

No two sides to Trump. He is and out and out bully, exhibiting ALL the traits of a bully. One of those traits is that whenever he as gets even a tiny portion back at him that he dishes out with regularity he goes into FULL crybaby mode.

Vinny

Crybaby or just luring the suckers into pitbull territory? I am not quite sure.

[pmward]

in a thread about sticking to investing, the trump bad - politics posting has gotten pretty thick,

Yeah I guess it probably would be a hopeless cause splitting it off to a different site.

[doodle]

in a thread about sticking to investing, the trump bad - politics posting has gotten pretty thick,

what are we protesting about again?

I'm just responding to Some Guys praise of Trump standing up to bullies. Anyways, I'm supposed to be on a forum vacation. I need to split.

[l82start]

in a thread about sticking to investing, the trump bad - politics posting has gotten pretty thick,

Yeah I guess it probably would be a hopeless cause splitting it off to a different site.

LOL agreed

[yankees60]

I agree the forum is being split in two directions and I vote we get rid of the finance and investing talk and focus on the politics. Politics is interesting and dynamically changing while the PP has been the same for 20+ years.

How hard is the permanent portfolio, really? The whole point is that it’s simple and brainless once you have it set up. Do we really need to keep discussing the best gold coin of 2020 to buy?

I come here for the politics and get sucked into reading about gold ETFs and it’s really distracting me from political conversation.

Our beloved Tomfoolery has spoken!

Amusing, as usual.

I also know this is your usual satirical comment. I for one still have tons of questions on specific implementation of various aspects of the Permanent Portfolio.

Vinny

Vinny my interweb friend, you seem to be a very very precise person. Thus my question, exactly how many questions are in a ton, or tonne if you are feeling particularly British at this particular moment ?

You are correct that I can be an extremely precise person. Sometimes maddingly precise for some who have to deal with me in real life. But to better answer your question...once I get back on my Permanent Portfolio journey you shall see in real time!

Vinny

You said tons. Thus my question above. If I just watch your PP reengagement, how will I ever know exactly when you pass from one ton of questions into the second ton? Would you be kind enough to flag the appropriate end to the first ton?

I will endeavor to do so just for my dear friend known as Mountaineer!

Vinny

[yankees60]

I have to agree with doodle on this. It's a bit silly invoking Trump as someone who stands up to bullies...
..or is it?

I can see both sides.
On a personal level, yes, Trump will sue you for attacking him or give harder than he got. It's fair to say he's something of a bully.
In the realm of politics, he doesn't put up with what he perceives as bs. So somedude's point is valid.

No two sides to Trump. He is and out and out bully, exhibiting ALL the traits of a bully. One of those traits is that whenever he as gets even a tiny portion back at him that he dishes out with regularity he goes into FULL crybaby mode.

Vinny

Crybaby or just luring the suckers into pitbull territory? I am not quite sure.

Certified crybaby. Just checked my dictionary for the definition of crybaby and Trump's picture was there.

Vinny

[Mountaineer]

I have to agree with doodle on this. It's a bit silly invoking Trump as someone who stands up to bullies...
..or is it?

I can see both sides.
On a personal level, yes, Trump will sue you for attacking him or give harder than he got. It's fair to say he's something of a bully.
In the realm of politics, he doesn't put up with what he perceives as bs. So somedude's point is valid.

No two sides to Trump. He is and out and out bully, exhibiting ALL the traits of a bully. One of those traits is that whenever he as gets even a tiny portion back at him that he dishes out with regularity he goes into FULL crybaby mode.

Vinny

Crybaby or just luring the suckers into pitbull territory? I am not quite sure.

Certified crybaby. Just checked my dictionary for the definition of crybaby and Trump's picture was there.

Vinny

I concede! You are the man. Unless I call for a recount. Or issue an Executive Order. Or ask the NYT to give an opinion. Or pardon myself.

[Xan]

There are now 10 people in my poll, a poll that is in this section that people can opt out of mind you, that have said yes they have considered leaving this forum because of politics. Why is that? Well, why when there is a car accident on the freeway to people slow down to look as they pass by? It's basically impossible to ignore it, whether or not you get notifications.

"Have considered" with no time window is really not at all meaningful. "Are you considering" would be much more meaningful. Why did you phrase it the way you did?

As for something more drastic, like banning political talk completely, it just isn't going to happen. "Splitting" the forum isn't going to happen either, because a "split" forum is just another forum, and part of the "split" would be the complete banning of political talk that already isn't going to happen.

We're all still getting used to the new ignorable subforum. And we're at "peak politics" as has been pointed out. Things will settle down. Please do just ignore the politics forum if you don't like it.

It seems that the real complaint is that there are discussions going on in the political forum that you don't like, and rather than just ignore them you want them to be banned. I honestly don't understand that viewpoint at all. The system gives you an easy way to just ignore the whole thing. If you're not tempted to navigate to a different site, then why are you tempted to click on "Politics"?

So you can stop asking. The answer is no. There will be no ban on political discussions. Having them in their own ignorable section is a fine solution that should satisfy everybody.

[pmward]

"Have considered" with no time window is really not at all meaningful. "Are you considering" would be much more meaningful. Why did you phrase it the way you did?

In hindsight I would have phrased it that way.

It seems that the real complaint is that there are discussions going on in the political forum that you don't like, and rather than just ignore them you want them to be banned. I honestly don't understand that viewpoint at all. The system gives you an easy way to just ignore the whole thing. If you're not tempted to navigate to a different site, then why are you tempted to click on "Politics"?

This is part of the problem. The generalization and assumptions. You don't really know that this is the reason people are upset. So you make this broad assumption and use that as a way to discount every other opinion. This happens A LOT on this forum. The fact is that many people have left because of this, and many people have considered leaving because of this. I personally don't think it's the content that offends people, it's the way people are treated.

I've also never once asked for a "ban" on political discussions. So you're being very presumptuous there as well. Like when you try to tell me what I think and why I made the suggestion, and it totally doesn't match what I think or why I made the suggestion... like you obviously don't get it or don't care. And that is frustrating.

Either way, I already conceded in my response to L82start that the way even this thread devolved into Trump vs not-Trump it was probably hopeless to even try to separate the two. I figured it was worth the suggestion, or at least the discussion. I hope you're right that "peak politics" will pass and things will settle back down. I love the political philosophical discussions. But the whole partisan politics thing... especially how every thread these days keeps devolving into an endless Trump vs not-Trump debate... I'm getting really frustrated. I'm trying to have patience and hope the storm blows over come Dec 14 with the elector vote, or at the very latest Jan 20 after the inauguration.

[yankees60]

"Have considered" with no time window is really not at all meaningful. "Are you considering" would be much more meaningful. Why did you phrase it the way you did?

In hindsight I would have phrased it that way.

It seems that the real complaint is that there are discussions going on in the political forum that you don't like, and rather than just ignore them you want them to be banned. I honestly don't understand that viewpoint at all. The system gives you an easy way to just ignore the whole thing. If you're not tempted to navigate to a different site, then why are you tempted to click on "Politics"?

This is part of the problem. The generalization and assumptions. You don't really know that this is the reason people are upset. So you make this broad assumption and use that as a way to discount every other opinion. This happens A LOT on this forum. The fact is that many people have left because of this, and many people have considered leaving because of this. I personally don't think it's the content that offends people, it's the way people are treated.

I've also never once asked for a "ban" on political discussions. So you're being very presumptuous there as well. Like when you try to tell me what I think and why I made the suggestion, and it totally doesn't match what I think or why I made the suggestion... like you obviously don't get it or don't care. And that is frustrating.

Either way, I already conceded in my response to L82start that the way even this thread devolved into Trump vs not-Trump it was probably hopeless to even try to separate the two. I hope you're right that "peak politics" will pass and things will settle back down. I love the political philosophical discussions. But the whole partisan politics thing... especially how every thread these days keeps devolving into an endless Trump vs not-Trump debate... I'm getting really frustrated. I'm trying to have patience and hope the storm blows over come Dec 14 with the elector vote, or at the very latest Jan 20 after the inauguration.

Before you know it....the next 48 days will have passed!

Vinny