optionman's Account Talk

[SteveTSP]

I can't speak for Optionman, but I did exchange PMs with him about three weeks ago and he stated that he was not posting anymore on this MB and the tracker was not reflective of his current position. I thanked him for his informative insights and wished him well! I will miss his posts and positions! Steve

 

[JTH]

I can't speak for Optionman, but I did exchange PMs with him about three weeks ago and he stated that he was not posting anymore on this MB and the tracker was not reflective of his current position. I thanked him for his informative insights and wished him well! I will miss his posts and positions! Steve

Steve, thanks for getting an update for us.

 

[tsptalk]

Apparently, optionman is no longer posting his transfers. Should we take his account off of the tracker? It would seem that if the return and allocation are not reflective of his current position, it could incorrectly influence people.

I'll post a poll...

 

[CapeChem]

"It would seem that if the return and allocation are not reflective of his current position, it could incorrectly influence people. "

I agree....remove him

 

[JTH]

Just for the record, I voted yes, I was planning on sending Tom a PM about this.

If anything it should marked as inactive, so that the community isn't intentionally mislead.

 

[Steadygain]

Apparently, optionman is no longer posting his transfers. Should we take his account off of the tracker? It would seem that if the return and allocation are not reflective of his current position, it could incorrectly influence people.

I'll post a poll...

Tom,
I'll vote YES on this poll

But I don't believe a poll is the right option - no offense to you or the MB.

To me this is a personal decision that Optionman has independently made - and I believe anyone should have that freedom

and in so doing be removed from the AT.

To remove him from the AT shows we honor his decision.


OPTIONMAN - YOU'VE DONE OUTSTANDING - I ADMIRE YOUR DECISION AND THE NEED TO ABANDON THE SPOTLIGHT.

 

[tsptalk]

To play devil's advocate, I have not been a fan of letting those who are doing poorly opt out of the tracker because they aren't doing well. This promotes members staying in when doing well, and being taken out of the spot light when doing poorly.

If someone is doing poorly and "gives up", they just flounder near the bottom of the tracker and no one seems to care.

The rule basically states that abandoned accounts won't be removed but they will not be eligible for any prizes. This is an unusual situation in that optionman was doing so well before he left (although we really have no idea what kind of transfers he's made since his last transfer and posts in March.)

The question is, do we take him off because he is doing well and others may follow an aboandoned account? This would be an exception to the rule.

 

[Birchtree]

I thought the rule was that you had to sign in at least once every 90 days to remain active on the tracker - he should stay until his time limit expires. That would be fair.

 

[Intrepid_Timer]

I thought the rule was that you had to sign in at least once every 90 days to remain active on the tracker - he should stay until his time limit expires. That would be fair.

Agreed. I believe the mlkman came up with that rule.

 

[JTH]

Agreed. I believe the mlkman came up with that rule.

Ah the MilkMan, isn't his suspension up? :cheesy:

 

[tsptalk]

I thought the rule was that you had to sign in at least once every 90 days to remain active on the tracker - he should stay until his time limit expires. That would be fair.

We actually changed that rule about a month ago because people were being delisted for inactivity, then asking to be put back on.

(http://www.tsptalk.com/mb/showthread.php?p=215965#post215965)

 

[poolman]

Apparently, optionman is no longer posting his transfers. Should we take his account off of the tracker? It would seem that if the return and allocation are not reflective of his current position, it could incorrectly influence people.

I'll post a poll...

I think He should be taken off the tracker because as you said His "return and allocation are not reflective of his current position, it could incorrectly influence people".

If anything we know that his allocation has been the best -vs- everyone's else's allocation to present.

 

[Steadygain]

To play devil's advocate, I have not been a fan of letting those who are doing poorly opt out of the tracker because they aren't doing well. This promotes members staying in when doing well, and being taken out of the spot light when doing poorly.

I can certainly appreciate your feelings on this Tom and in all sincerity it would seem 'the fairest thing to do is make everyone join the AT' but there are many who do not and we are powerless to force them in.

When the AT becomes a burden for anyone - whatever the reason then they should have the freedom to be removed without any hassels. I think we need to respect all those willing to remain on the AT and maybe even more (or equally respect those who choose to get off) because there has to be some degree of difficulty or uncomfort - for them to want to leave.

The question is, do we take him off because he is doing well and others may follow an aboandoned account? This would be an exception to the rule.

I'm sorry Tom - and I'm not saying this to be argumentative or difficult. The question is not do we take him off BECAUSE HE IS DOING WELL - the question is do we honor his decision to be removed from the AT regardless of how he/she is doing.

If anyone makes known: 'I will no longer acknowledge my IFTs on the AT' then that is in essense saying: 'Please take me off the AT'.

I have no idea what the 'rules' are and only speak from my heart.

 

[CapeChem]

for me..It was never that he was doing well...taking him off the AT would not be a matter of discussion had optionman not said anything.....He basically asked to be removed by his statements....but hey, anyone who is active on the MB now knows his status and his feelings and when i look at the leader board i dont see optionman as the leader.........ooooo, better idea, lets follow baseball and just put an asterisk by his results!!!

 

[Intrepid_Timer]

I propose a 6-month rule. If one doesn't make a move in their account in six months they are basically a buy and holder and should be removed from the tracker. Friends don't let friends buy and hold after all.......................

 

[Birchtree]

A six month rule will not work - I may not make any moves in the next six months. Instead if there is no six month tracker sign in that would work. My friends do let friends buy and hold.

 

[Intrepid_Timer]

A six month rule will not work - I may not make any moves in the next six months. Instead if there is no six month tracker sign in that would work. My friends do let friends buy and hold.

If anyone wants to track you, they can just track the C fund silly goose.........

 

[Intrepid_Timer]

Besides, the tracker was set up to track people who trade their accounts, not buy and hold them.

 

[Birchtree]

I wouldn't fly that close to the sun if I were you. The I funders that are now in the 30 range rankings are all buy and holders - you need us for fair comparison. Bunny hopping does not work all the time. Sometimes simply time in the market can be more profitable than timing the markets.

 

[tsptalk]

I propose a 6-month rule. If one doesn't make a move in their account in six months they are basically a buy and holder and should be removed from the tracker. Friends don't let friends buy and hold after all.......................

There you go! We'll give them a big "B&H" scarlet letters. Although there are a lot of folks who sat in the G fund for a long time. Sell and holders, I guess.