Deleted Threads from the "High Yield Strategies" board - 15 Jun 20

[MDW1954]

I found the initial posts very interesting, so it is disappointing to hear they will not be reposted and have been permanently deleted.

No, they haven't been permanently deleted -- the position hasn't changed since you and I last communicated on this. I checked just now, and they are still where I put them.

To the board at large: as some of the heat seems to have gone out of this, and taking note of Lootman's apology, I am willing to invest the time in re-posting the two threads, having removed the contentious posts in question.

If I did so, I would re-post on the original board, not HYP-P.

What does the board think of this? My own view is that it would be a shame if Ian's exercise simply vanished.

If people don't want it, I won't do it. But if you would like it, make your voices heard.

MDW1954

[seagles]

I found the initial posts very interesting, so it is disappointing to hear they will not be reposted and have been permanently deleted.

No, they haven't been permanently deleted -- the position hasn't changed since you and I last communicated on this. I checked just now, and they are still where I put them.

To the board at large: as some of the heat seems to have gone out of this, and taking note of Lootman's apology, I am willing to invest the time in re-posting the two threads, having removed the contentious posts in question.

If I did so, I would re-post on the original board, not HYP-P.

What does the board think of this? My own view is that it would be a shame if Ian's exercise simply vanished.

If people don't want it, I won't do it. But if you would like it, make your voices heard.

MDW1954

My only comment is that Ian asked for them to be removed, surely he, as the op, should have the final say?

[Wizard]

I found the initial posts very interesting, so it is disappointing to hear they will not be reposted and have been permanently deleted.

No, they haven't been permanently deleted -- the position hasn't changed since you and I last communicated on this. I checked just now, and they are still where I put them.

To the board at large: as some of the heat seems to have gone out of this, and taking note of Lootman's apology, I am willing to invest the time in re-posting the two threads, having removed the contentious posts in question.

If I did so, I would re-post on the original board, not HYP-P.

What does the board think of this? My own view is that it would be a shame if Ian's exercise simply vanished.

If people don't want it, I won't do it. But if you would like it, make your voices heard.

MDW1954

I think it would be a good thing. My quoted comment was because I thought Ian said he had asked for them to be deleted.

[Dod101]

It is up to MDW whether he wishes to continue to comply with the wishes of the op who is quite clear that he wished the posts to be deleted and this matter is now for him to resolve with the op.

Dod

[TUK020]

I found the initial posts very interesting, so it is disappointing to hear they will not be reposted and have been permanently deleted.

No, they haven't been permanently deleted -- the position hasn't changed since you and I last communicated on this. I checked just now, and they are still where I put them.

To the board at large: as some of the heat seems to have gone out of this, and taking note of Lootman's apology, I am willing to invest the time in re-posting the two threads, having removed the contentious posts in question.

If I did so, I would re-post on the original board, not HYP-P.

What does the board think of this? My own view is that it would be a shame if Ian's exercise simply vanished.

If people don't want it, I won't do it. But if you would like it, make your voices heard.

MDW1954

I think it would be a good thing. My quoted comment was because I thought Ian said he had asked for them to be deleted.

there was some good stuff there before it descended into bickering.
It the op is ok with it, would be good to have it back on the original board

[MDW1954]

All: Ian simply wanted the posts removed. "Deleted" was shorthand for that. He discussed, in PMs to me, re-posting them subsequently on HYP-P. He probably didn't know that we have a facility for "parking" stuff out of the way while decisions are made. (We get quite a few dodgy spam-like posts that need checking out, for instance.)

Let's see what a few more folk think, and take it from there. But the feeling I'm getting is that you'd prefer any re-posting to be with Ian's explicit approval...?

MDW1954

[88V8]

If people don't want it, I won't do it. But if you would like it, make your voices heard.

Yes, please.

V8

[88V8]

If people don't want it, I won't do it. But if you would like it, make your voices heard.

Yes, please.

But the feeling I'm getting is that you'd prefer any re-posting to be with Ian's explicit approval...?

Well iirc it was to be an ongoing exercise, so someone will need to run it in future.

V8

[JuanDB]

I would like to see them reinstated.

[AJC5001]

What does the board think of this? My own view is that it would be a shame if Ian's exercise simply vanished.

If people don't want it, I won't do it. But if you would like it, make your voices heard.

MDW1954

I would like to see them restored, but only if Ian was willing.

Presumably if restored they would be locked to prevent any more posts?

Adrian

[Dod101]

MDW asks what the Board thinks of reinstatement. I have no wish to be controversial but frankly, often enough, the OP has been the cause of bickering in otherwise entirely interesting and constructive threads. He is the one who needs to look to his own posts before he takes umbrage about others spoiling his. He has often been disruptive and sarcastic bordering on rude so I suggest that he looks at his own behaviour before flouncing off like a spoilt child.

I assume that that is what IAAG was hinting at in an earlier post.

Dod

[Itsallaguess]

I assume that that is what IAAG was hinting at in an earlier post.

Just for clarity Dod, what I was hinting at in my earlier post is that a successful outcome for the long-running issues in this area is only going to come about when everyone plays their part in helping to produce it...

I hope that the two comparison threads are able to be reinstated, and that the OP can be left alone to continue what I hope will be a really interesting and long-running comparison exercise.

If anyone thinks a more robust comparison can be made, then they are of course free to carry out that different comparison themselves on a separate thread..

Cheers,

Itsallaguess

[Dod101]

Just for clarity Dod, what I was hinting at in my earlier post is that a successful outcome for the long-running issues in this area is only going to come about when everyone plays their part in helping to produce it...

Thanks IAAG. You are rather more diplomatic in this area than I am. I will say no more.

Dod

[Wizard]

Ian's "So long and thanks for all the fish" comment suggested he may not be visiting the site any more. If so I guess he can't agree to reinstatement.

[dealtn]

I would vote for reinstatement of both threads, and in their original place.

I would hope that the OP will continue to update them.

If absolutely necessary, as this is a worthwhile exercise in itself, but threatened by constant "polluting" of the thread(s) by arguments, it is noted that certain threads are clearly marked as "no discussion". The one that immediately springs to mind is "Dividend Cuts, Suspensions, ... " (or similar). So maybe a similar policy could be adopted with these threads, and self-policed and moderated on that basis. Of course discussion of the threads, and the competing theories behind them, could still take place, but on a separate thread.

[tjh290633]

I would suggest that only the initial post be reinstated, all the trolling posts should be permanantly deleted, and that any updates or comments that Ian wishes to make, or did make, be also reinstated.

Then it could start afresh from there with more rigid policing, if needed.

TJH

[dealtn]

I would suggest that only the initial post be reinstated, all the trolling posts should be permanantly deleted, and that any updates or comments that Ian wishes to make, or did make, be also reinstated.

Then it could start afresh from there with more rigid policing, if needed.

TJH

Not every post after the initial one was a "trolling post"

[tjh290633]

I would suggest that only the initial post be reinstated, all the trolling posts should be permanantly deleted, and that any updates or comments that Ian wishes to make, or did make, be also reinstated.

Then it could start afresh from there with more rigid policing, if needed.

TJH

Not every post after the initial one was a "trolling post"

I appreciate that, but it might be better to restart the thread with a clean sheet.

TJH

[MDW1954]

Moderator Message:
I have heard back from IanTHughes. He is emphatic that he doesn't want the original threads reinstating under his name, but that I am welcome to post them under another's name.

I will post them under my name, making clear that they are not my own work.

I intend to make the posts unlocked, but will lock them if history simply repeats itself.

IanTHughes has led me to believe that he still reads the site, but won't be posting. He has also offered to make available his existing comparison data to anyone who asks, and also a broader comparison, involving more ITs than just CTY.

MDW1954