Investment Discussion

[SteMiS]

I came to LF, as I came to TMF before it, specifically for material about investment matters, and it gets disappointing that so much material now seems to be about everything else, but investment matters. If I wanted to discuss politics, I would go to a politics focused forum. Because of my focus on investment trusts, I have more recently dabbled on the Citywire forum.

You don't have to read the non investment posts. Surely they only matter if, by posting on non investment matters, people posted less on investments. But I don't think that's the case. In fact if they didn't post on non investment matters, all you would be left with is...not that much. That would actually undermine the site because, presumably, the ad revenue which supports the site, is related to the traffic it receives.

[absolutezero]

I came to LF, as I came to TMF before it, specifically for material about investment matters, and it gets disappointing that so much material now seems to be about everything else, but investment matters. If I wanted to discuss politics, I would go to a politics focused forum. Because of my focus on investment trusts, I have more recently dabbled on the Citywire forum.

You don't have to read the non investment posts. Surely they only matter if, by posting on non investment matters, people posted less on investments. But I don't think that's the case. In fact if they didn't post on non investment matters, all you would be left with is...not that much. That would actually undermine the site because, presumably, the ad revenue which supports the site, is related to the traffic it receives.

What ads? I see no ads.
Might be something to do with Ad Block Plus, but who actually sees ads these days?!

[XFool]

Back in the TMF days, it was possible to get the impression that some posters to the TMF LOST board were acting as spokespeople for New Labour, defending everything the then Government did regardless of its merits.

I remember LOST!

If I remember correctly( ), one could hardly move for posts criticising whatever the then Labour government did, regardless of its merits, constant attacks on "lefties" (some scandalous and even possibly actionable), and that old house favourite: "The BBC is undermining western civilisation as we know it!"

Now there is criticism of people who took an opposing stance on LOST? So, what you mean is - in simple terms: Right wing, OK; Left wing, illegitimate.

I see no reason to agree with that, I didn't at the time, I don't now and I won't in the future. Unless there is a condition of entry to TLF: "You can only apply for membership if you can prove membership of The Conservative Party or UKIP."

Fortunately, TLF still does seem generally better in this respect than TMF. IMO.

[kiloran]

To use the analogy of a gardening forum, mentioned earlier, I wouldn't expect to go to a gardening forum and discuss motorbikes or politics.

If you are into gardening, try: https://www.gardenerscorner.co.uk/threa ... 11.128544/
or: https://www.gardenerscorner.co.uk/threa ... rs.127932/

--kiloran

[SteMiS]

Back in the TMF days, it was possible to get the impression that some posters to the TMF LOST board were acting as spokespeople for New Labour, defending everything the then Government did regardless of its merits.

I remember LOST!

If I remember correctly( ), one could hardly move for posts criticising whatever the then Labour government did, regardless of its merits, constant attacks on "lefties" (some scandalous and even possibly actionable), and that old house favourite: "The BBC is undermining western civilisation as we know it!"

Now there is criticism of people who took an opposing stance on LOST? So, what you mean is - in simple terms: Right wing, OK; Left wing, illegitimate.

I see no reason to agree with that, I didn't at the time, I don't now and I won't in the future. Unless there is a condition of entry to TLF: "You can only apply for membership if you can prove membership of The Conservative Party or UKIP."

Fortunately, TLF still does seem generally better in this respect than TMF. IMO.

Well he can't mean me. I spent most of my time on LOST slagging off the Labour government. In fact, until he went, I spent quite a bit of time on PD attacking Corbyn. I think part of the problem on CAN is actually the lack of political diversity. Despite the ludicrous accusations there isn't any real left wing advocate on there (I can only think of one who was and he seems to have gone). It's real a conversation between centrists and the right.

[richfool]

I came to LF, as I came to TMF before it, specifically for material about investment matters, and it gets disappointing that so much material now seems to be about everything else, but investment matters. If I wanted to discuss politics, I would go to a politics focused forum. Because of my focus on investment trusts, I have more recently dabbled on the Citywire forum.

You don't have to read the non investment posts. Surely they only matter if, by posting on non investment matters, people posted less on investments. But I don't think that's the case. In fact if they didn't post on non investment matters, all you would be left with is...not that much. That would actually undermine the site because, presumably, the ad revenue which supports the site, is related to the traffic it receives.

I generally don't (read them, unless I think they have a relevance to my investments), but more recently I seem to be left with little else to read, as the investment orientated posts seem to be drying up. Perhaps I am fishing in the wrong pond and they just haven't changed the sign yet!

[XFool]

I think part of the problem on CAN is actually the lack of political diversity. Despite the ludicrous accusations there isn't any real left wing advocate on there (I can only think of one who was and he seems to have gone).

Yes. Wasn't he completely anti-Corbyn too?

It's real a conversation between centrists and the right.

Of course it is! But, nowadays, particularly online: "centrist" means "not right-wing", 'means' "Lefty!"

[Lootman]

there isn't any real left wing advocate on there (I can only think of one who was and he seems to have gone). It's real a conversation between centrists and the right.

Then surely that reflects the political diversity of the nation as a whole, which for the last 40 years has been in a range from the centre to the right, with traditional lefties being seen as rather irrelevant products of a time long ago. Corbyn was merely an aberration and a throwback, in that respect.

Out of curiosity who was the "real" leftie on TLF? There are some clueless bleeding hearts here for sure, but no real socialists. This is hardly the place for those who wish to nationalize the FTSE-100 companies without compensation.

[XFool]

there isn't any real left wing advocate on there (I can only think of one who was and he seems to have gone). It's real a conversation between centrists and the right.

Then surely that reflects the political diversity of the nation as a whole, which for the last 40 years has been in a range from the centre to the right, with traditional lefties being seen as rather irrelevant products of a time long ago.

There is, though, an assumption in there - one of representativeness.

I can think of another financial site which, if I were to make the same assumption as you appear to be making, I might conclude most people in the UK were likely round the bend.

Of course, both of our assumptions could still be true...

[Lootman]

there isn't any real left wing advocate on there (I can only think of one who was and he seems to have gone). It's real a conversation between centrists and the right.

Then surely that reflects the political diversity of the nation as a whole, which for the last 40 years has been in a range from the centre to the right, with traditional lefties being seen as rather irrelevant products of a time long ago.

There is, though, an assumption in there - one of representativeness.

I can think of another financial site which, if I were to make the same assumption as you appear to be making, I might conclude most people in the UK were likely round the bend.

Hard to comment on that unless you identify the claimed site. The idea that the Overton window has irreversibly moved to the right (or rather reverted to a more normal and reasonable mean) since the Reagan/Thatcher revolution is hardly, well, revolutionary.

[kiloran]

I just looked at the New Posts on TLF. Exactly 50% of the threads were finance/investment related, which seems reasonable to me. (though I suspect that if I delved deeper into the finance threads, some will have drifted off-topic)

I suspect the real problem is that some threads (Coronavirus, Musk, Communist UK and a few others) tend to have a large number of postings with almost real-time responses/arguments

--kiloran

[scotia]

This is hardly the place for those who wish to nationalize the FTSE-100 companies without compensation.

Given the dire performance of the FTSE 100 compared to the rest of the world markets - maybe anything is worth a try?
How about some other suggestions on how to give the FTSE 100 a kick upwards? That should get us back to worthwhile investment discussions.

[XFool]

7. The 'argue-until-the-far-end-of-a-fart' brigade ('I'm going to break every post that I'm replying to into tiny sub-quotes and thus make every one of my own posts instantly un-readable to anyone daft enough to actually be reading my posts any more' section - note that membership of this section ALWAYS comes with automatic membership of sections 1 and 2...)

You are coming preciously close there to identifying an individual Lemon. Although you should add "and I always put a smiley on the end just to show it's all in fun really".

How strange! I thought exactly the same thing...

2. The 'argue-until-the-far-end-of-a-fart' brigade ('I ABSOLUTELY refuse to let anyone have the last word on an argument' section..)

3. The 'argue-until-the-far-end-of-a-fart' brigade ('they're not actually falling for my trap, so I'll have to invent a strawman to paint them in a worse light' section..)

5. The 'argue-until-the-far-end-of-a-fart' brigade ('what you're talking about is a subjective topic, and as such there is no right and wrong answer - we're clearly going to be here all day' section..)

Sorry about the smiley!

[XFool]

I think this gets back to the heart of what kiloran was saying though Stemis, in that there's a sense of 'community' here that's upheld and encouraged in many of the investment and non-investment areas of the site, such as Beerpig's Snug, and then there's a huge level of negativity that takes much away from that sense of 'community' in other, much more aggressive and argumentative areas of the site.

I think at the heart of Dod's opening post, there's a sense that the broader community is worse off, both for those of us who currently enjoy it, and also for those that might be encouraged to join it, if the aggressive arguments continue to share a large and growing part of the discussion bandwidth...

While I too recognise that community is an important factor for many, I confess that for me it can hold a rather ambiguous resonance. SteMis has already mentioned the village pub, where everyone falls silent when you (a 'foreigner') come through the door - that's "community".

You can be breezing along, enjoying yourself, thinking all is well in the world, trying to be helpful or light hearted (is that allowed outside Laughing Lemons?) when without any warning out of the blue some member of the "community" comes charging at you like an enraged bull - that's "community".

Some while ago I mentioned some of the odd things I encountered on TMF. One thing I remember was that in an ongoing thread one could post a (possibly!) interesting suggestion. Nothing.

Many post later on some 'well respected member of the community' would post the same or very similar suggestion. This was immediately followed by posts declaring: "What a splendid suggestion! Have a rec old bean" etc. - that's "community".
(In that case I could at least see a mechanical reason for how it could happen)

"community"? I can take it or leave it.

[Lootman]

I think this gets back to the heart of what kiloran was saying though Stemis, in that there's a sense of 'community' here that's upheld and encouraged in many of the investment and non-investment areas of the site, such as Beerpig's Snug, and then there's a huge level of negativity that takes much away from that sense of 'community' in other, much more aggressive and argumentative areas of the site.

I think at the heart of Dod's opening post, there's a sense that the broader community is worse off, both for those of us who currently enjoy it, and also for those that might be encouraged to join it, if the aggressive arguments continue to share a large and growing part of the discussion bandwidth...

"community"? I can take it or leave it.

Perhaps, to paraphrase JFK, you should ask not what the community can do for you, but what you can do for the community?

[tjh290633]

While I too recognise that community is an important factor for many, I confess that for me it can hold a rather ambiguous resonance. SteMis has already mentioned the village pub, where everyone falls silent when you (a 'foreigner') come through the door - that's "community".

There is the habit in Wales, when a foreigner enters a pub or shop, of everybody speaking Welsh. Then you order in Welsh and say "Diolch yn fawr" and they revert to English.

TJH