No. of Recommendations: 6
I agree fully with Lear, I agree more than fully with Texirish - - - but I also see another side:
There are plenty of intelligent people on this board, with a capacity for critical thinking and reflection ... You're unwillingness or inability to see the board as a multi-faceted forum with real, intelligent human beings on the other end isn't a Jim problem, or a problem of a bunch of dim bulbs following a leader. It's a you problem.
This is correct - and wrong! In other words: Too simple (as judgements usually are; the world is more complex).
While there are numerous intelligent people on this board, able to to their due diligence in investing, there are also numerous "dim bulbs" like myself when it comes to that. Intelligence doesn't give you the skills required for good investing (otherwise Buffett wouldn't stand out).
Lacking those skills (and you can't just aquire all kinds of skills, to say that would be too simple again) many of us do indeed "follow the leader" and have no way to assess how good or bad his ideas are. It's the most natural thing to follow someone you think is superior in a certain field. That's what experts are for. To be critical regarding their assessments requires a lot of skills and knowledge not everybody has or for various reasons cannot aquire.
If you don't see that there is this big group here (I include myself, having followed - uncritical, as I can't really assess DLTR, KMX or DG - Jim several times now) you contradict your own words of this being a "multi-faceted forum".
One more thing: I fully agree with Dealraker when he says this:
I'm sure Jim could make up a post of completely irrational ideas, and maybe a few stocks that subsequently plummet, and the board would go all in.
That is because of 2 reasons. One is what I tried to explain: Many of us, though intelligent, nevertheless have good reasons to, yes uncritical, follow the compared to us superior expert.
The other is what Dealraker often mentions: The cult thing. It is a cult indeed. Just analyze the rec's Jim's posts get in relation to their content. It's very interesting. You'll find that as deeper the content of his posts as more rec's they get. As it should be. But you also notice that his "non-content" posts get rec's too. It's practically impossible for him to post without getting rec's, even if the whole content would be "Hi."
And that's the cult thing Dealraker mentions. That there is applause for the Guru's "Hi." post while there is none or less for the non-Guru's posts even when they contain content. That's not an objective thing, it's a Guru thing. Dealraker is absolutely right with that.
---------
Let me end a far too long post with a personal word: I too often stated contrary opinions here which are "blown into the wind", at best not interesting for the people here, at worst seen as attacking someone personally (Here: Lear, Texirish, Jim) while they are just meant to criticize not the person but something they said I found too simplified and/or single-sided, trying to see the other side.
I just can't resist if I see something I thing has to be corrected, can't keep my mouth shut. A big flaw and I am I am tired of that myself. So as with my post about my huge selling, with had the purpose to "keep myself honest" by having openly stated that here, I hereby openly say Goodbye to posting my contrary opinions and will try to only post if a have a question. I hope I can adhere to those intentions at least for a while.
