klan man, you are remembering wrong. It all started on page 36. "If Then More Than" corrected your typo of then vs than, then I piled in with two more errors.
I piled in basically saying that you get almost everything wrong, so we would be better off reminding you of how 'facts' work than needling you on grammar.
One of these days I will compile all the facts you got wrong and present them. That would be fun.
Down goes the Dow
Non-Running
Finance/Jobs
Report Thread
You are reporting this thread to the moderators for review and possible removal from the forum.
-
-
[quote]agip wrote:
klan man, you are remembering wrong. It all started on page 36. "If Then More Than" corrected your typo of then vs than, then I piled in with two more errors.
One of which had decisively proven to not be an error (despite your somewhat amazing denial) and the other of which was a claim that calling you Agip instead of agip is somehow a grammatical error.
By the way, are you also refuting my assertion that refutating is not a word? I point out an actual and somewhat grotesque example of improper knowledge/use of the English language and you, who will defend his assertions to his dying breath despite the fact they have been proved -- and I do not use that word lightly -- to be wrong is oddly silent on this.
What's up with that?
Can we safely assume you made up that BS about being an Ivy League grad? God help us if that is true. Refutating? I mean that is really something.
Isn't it true that you are in fact a just about average high school or junior high student? -
Klondike5 wrote:
...
By the way, are you also refuting my assertion that refutating is not a word? I point out an actual and somewhat grotesque example of improper knowledge/use of the English language and you, who will defend his assertions to his dying breath despite the fact they have been proved -- and I do not use that word lightly -- to be wrong is oddly silent on this...
Perhaps not lightly, but certainly incorrectly. The correct usage is 'have been proven'. -
refutating is not a word. I made an error.
when I am wrong, I admit it. When you are wrong you do not. For example, you are wrong on this very post - your memory was clearly faulty on the sequence of the start of this battle royal over compound adjectives.
But you haven't admitted it. Why not? -
"
Isn't it true that you are in fact a just about average high school or junior high student?"
no, I am actually a professional investor in my mid 40s with a perfect teenage son and a wonderful marriage of 18 years.
and I can still run mid 17 for 5k
and I went to an Ivy
and I have an MBA
and I waste way, way too much time on this website. I'm checking out for a while - this is ridiculous. -
agip wrote:
fair warning - I just put on what I call the agip hedge.
the SP 500 dropped below a certain technical mark, so by my rules I pulled a risk control rip cord and sold some. I also bought the vix and long term zero coupon bonds.
It is all a bit silly, b/c it adds up to only 3% of my portfolio (this is my fun money account), but I bring it up because...
Every time I do this, it works for 1-3 days, I make a few percent on my hedge and I am happy...and then give it all back in the big rally that inevitably follows.
So feel free to use me as a contrarian indicator here.
hedger wrote:
Hey agip - have you now removed the "agip hedge", since the S&P 500 is probably above that "certain technical mark"?
What is the "certain technical mark?" Surely you aren't hedging every time the S&P drops below the 50-day MA?
Did you lose money?
agip wrote:
of bloody course I lost money - the agip hedge never works.
I closed out the hedge with a $151 loss. Which is immaterial in relation to the size of my portfolio, but that would have been a very nice pair of running pants that I need. And a new pair of racing flats.
I use the 5-10-20 momentum strategy as a first line of risk control and a 200 day moving average strategy as a second line of risk control. THey are supposed to improve returns if you stick at it every time...but I started 2 years ago and they have probably cost me a couple of plane tickets to Europe.
http://marketsci.wordpress.com/2008/12/02/5-10-20-trend-following-strategy/
http://www.scottsinvestments.com/2009/09/15/backtesting-the-200-day-moving-average-on-spy/
Interesting, thanks!
I read the 5-10-20 strategy link you provided. It only goes to cash. Have you backtested your modification of buying the vix and zero-coupon bonds? Or are you just guessing that those will add value to the tested strategy?
It looks like the 5-10-20 avoided the 1987 crash. That's good!
Fair warning - for more credibility, if you post about initiating a position (like this hedge), you should probably provide timely updates on closing those positions.
After all, you (or FP) will be the first to call out the OP if he didn't promptly post if & when he buys back stocks.
So, it looks like you were hedged when this thread was started, right? And, at the end of June when the OP says he sold out? That's interesting. -
agip wrote:
"
Isn't it true that you are in fact a just about average high school or junior high student?"
no, I am actually a professional investor in my mid 40s with a perfect teenage son and a wonderful marriage of 18 years.
and I can still run mid 17 for 5k
and I went to an Ivy
and I have an MBA
and I waste way, way too much time on this website. I'm checking out for a while - this is ridiculous.
And you don't know when to use capital letters, or periods, or hypens.
We'll sure miss you. Hugs and Kisses. -
[quote]agip wrote:
refutating is not a word. I made an error.
when I am wrong, I admit it.
Yeah right.
Pretty hard to deny that one.
Quite an error it was too. Might make one think that you are semi-illiterate. -
Klondike5 wrote:
[quote]agip wrote:
refutating is not a word. I made an error.
when I am wrong, I admit it.
Yeah right.
Pretty hard to deny that one.
Quite an error it was too. Might make one think that you are semi-illiterate.
You have repeatedly proven agip to be correct in asserting that he does admit his errors whereas you do not. That is a pretty fundamental distinction and one of the reasons (though by no means the only one) that agip is widely respected on these boards whereas you - well, let's just say not so much.
Someone did indeed point out your error regarding 'then' vs 'than' to which you stated (and I quote):
"No 'someone else' pointed out one (non) error"
The error may well have been simply a typo (although your vehement argument with Mr. If then suggests otherwise) but still it was without any doubt an error. Thus your claim that it was a (non) error is disingenuous at best.
Then, of course, came your egregious error in stating, "...despite the fact they have been proved -- and I do not use that word lightly -- to be wrong is oddly silent on this...".
Obviously, there is no possible way that this could be attributed to being a mere typo. So when it was correctly pointed out that...
"Perhaps not lightly, but certainly incorrectly. The correct usage is 'have been proven'."
you conveniently ignored the correction of your error. Of course, to do otherwise would have exposed your lack of intelligence. Instead, you chose to put your lack of integrity on display.
One of you and agip is at their very core a liar. And here is your hint - it isn't agip. -
Engrishman wrote:
Klondike5 wrote:
...
By the way, are you also refuting my assertion that refutating is not a word? I point out an actual and somewhat grotesque example of improper knowledge/use of the English language and you, who will defend his assertions to his dying breath despite the fact they have been proved -- and I do not use that word lightly -- to be wrong is oddly silent on this...
Perhaps not lightly, but certainly incorrectly. The correct usage is 'have been proven'.
Maybe. Do you have any proof? -
Here is what I could find on this topic.
It seems that, yet again, my detractors are proved (not proven) wrong.
"Proven is usually an adjective (e.g., a proven formula), and proved is usually the inflected form of the verb prove (e.g., I proved it; I have proved it).
This is not a rule, though, and exceptions abound, especially in American English, where proven is often used as a participial inflection of the verb. For example, where a British writer is likely to write I have proved you wrong, an American writer might write I have proven you wrong."
Seeing as I was using prove as a verb, the accepted rule is to use proved and not proven. Something is proved wrong, not proven wrong -- although either is acceptable in American English. Proved to be is preferred to proven to be.
Englishman may have gotten confused by my using a more complicated tense -- proved to be wrong as opposed to simply proved wrong. A bit too much for his simple brain.
You guys really ought to get on more solid footing before launching such gay grammatical attacks.
Your only self defense mechanism is that you inevitable are incapable of acknowledging your errors.
Keep trying if you wish but please be a bit more challenging. -
The scary thing is that I am getting all of these grammatical trivialities correct purely by feel while you guys have the time to look into the rules and then attack me yet are getting them all wrong.
-
Where are all my illiterate detractors?
Got to go.
Give it your "best" shot and I will check back in the morning to see what inanities you come up with this time. -
K5 wrote:
Where are all my illiterate detractors?
Got to go.
Give it your "best" shot and I will check back in the morning to see what inanities you come up with this time.
jfc I just had an epiphany -
Klondike actually enjoys the abuse - he is a masochist, lapping it up.
Now I understand his motivation - he needs the attention we give him, even if it is negative, so he feeds us his gutter spewage, counting on us to hate on him.
He gets off on it. He probably doesn't have anyone else to pay attention to him, so he needs us.
Ach, what a pity. -
K5 wrote:
The facts don't support your assertions.
I made no assertion.
K5 wrote:
@ 25% of undergrads at Harvard are Jewish.
So overnight the numbers drop from 50% (per your earlier post) to 25%. And you have the audacity to accuse others here of being liars? -
I sort wish I hadn't written that last post - probably too personal. And to head off klan man, his 50% number was of the non white population, not the entire student body.
He's not all wrong on the Harvard data- be careful debating him on that. -
agip wrote:
I sort wish I hadn't written that last post - probably too personal. And to head off klan man, his 50% number was of the non white population, not the entire student body.
He's not all wrong on the Harvard data- be careful debating him on that.
So he is saying that only half of Harvard students are white? Interesting. I wonder how many of the non-whites he believes are Jewish. -
Klondike5 wrote:
Refutating? I mean that is really something.
Isn't it true that you are in fact a just about average high school or junior high student?
This from the guy who started a thread titled, "Syrai signs the CWC; giess who doesn't?".
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?board=1&id=5407394&thread=5395099 -
Anti-Semite detector wrote:
So he is saying that only half of Harvard students are white? Interesting.
Sounds about right. 46% non-white for the 4 minority categories outlined here (class of 2017). http://www.admissions.college.harvard.edu/apply/statistics.html -
Anti-Semite detector wrote:
So he is saying that only half of Harvard students are white? Interesting.
This seems to be current student body:
https://bigfuture.collegeboard.org/college-university-search/harvard-college
(Click on the "Majors & Learning Environment" link on the left to get the Race/Ethnicity breakdown.)
45% White
19% Asian
11% Non-resident Alien
9% Hispanic/Latino
7% Black or African American
5% Two or more races
4% Ethnicity unknown
