Why I "Rec"
January 09, 2009
– Comments (17) |
RELATED TICKERS: CHK
, BHY
, RHT
Not a financial discussion, but I think it's sort of relevant...
For me, one of the most instructional features of CAPS is the ability to read, comment, and post blogs. Yes, you can go out and find news articles, press releases, and government reports. Yes, there are certainly similar features on Yahoo Finance and others. And you can certainly do your own independent research, keeping your own opinion and notes.
But CAPS is, to me, a place where those who are interested in finance but don't have a job in finance can learn, grow, and join in the debate over "what's all mean, when you get right down to it?" (with due reverence to Terry Pratchett.)
RECommending
What makes CAPS valuable is that somewhere out there is someone who cares enough about jobs reports, currency fluctuations, biotechnology, and even chicken egg production numbers to analyse the information and post their thoughts. This is important, because raw numbers mean nothing, and it's difficult for anyone, expert or layman, to wrap his or her skull around the history, context, and implications of every industry and every move in the market.
Because these analyses are valuable, I make liberal use of my ability to hit the Recommend button. Basically, I use the following criteria:
1) The post is insightful, meaning that it digs below the surface to draw out the implications of an event or bit of new information.
2) The poster uses the information to support a view in a meaningful way. Maybe the information isn't directly relevant on the surface, but the blogger says, "Hey, this means that X will happen if you take it in conjuction with Y and Z that I pointed out six months ago."
and/or 3) The post causes a long discussion over the merits or flaws in an argument. The comments for or against go on and on, with multiple views presented and lots of data or first-hand observation added to the mix.
Please note that in none of my general criteria did I ever say that I had to agree with any of the posts or commentary. To me, the argument itself has value, and I can either make up my mind how I feel or decide that I don't have an opinion because I don't know enough (yet) or can't wrap my brain housing group around the ideas presented.
Also note that the poster's rank is not a factor, either. One of the sentiments on CAPS is that a lot of very smart people, defined by position, money, or power, have royally screwed up the economy because they wouldn't listen to people who take the time to really know the subject. Look at my favorites, and you can see I try to pick members from all across the scoring spectrum.
Ok, so why talk about it?
The reason I bring it up is because of a disturbing trend I have seen in several other sites I browse and (normally) lurk. Digg and DailyKos, for example, have comment wars over users who are perceived to abuse their ranking or who get "unfair" advantage because of their popularity. Today, for example, there's a digg post/article that even tries to pull YouTube into the fray.
DailyKos, in my humble opinion, has, at the moment, degenerated into an armed camp, split between multiple sides and reduced to name-calling. Some of this is because of the Israeli Gaza actions. I, however, tend to think that they are also a victim of their own success; DailyKos is a Democratic (the party, not the government) site that has "succeeded" in their goal of a majority in the government and are now finding that their own internal differences are hard to overcome.
What this has to do with CAPS
Recently, a lot of name calling and "accusations" have been directed on various articles in CAPS. Good discussions on economics, markets, and financials have been overcome with accusations of multiple accounts, some weird form of abusing the scoring system, and "yeah, but you don't know anything about subject X because you're an idiot."
To be fair, a lot of CAPS articles are supposed to be sarcastic and cynical, or even (jokingly) accusatory. I'm all for that. Sometimes, the way to get your point across is to stir the pot as hard as you can.
But the success of CAPS (and it's value) depends on its members. My own (cynical) view of humanity is a quote from an old Heinlein book: "If you put too many monkeys in a cage, they will start killing each other. Man is the only animal to do this intentionally." The other commentary sites I mention are possibly having this problem.
Times are hard, people get defensive, and it's easy to say "you don't know what your talking about." That's okay, as long as we, as a group, don't forget that there may be a nugget of truth or insight (or even a pony!) beneath that pile of manure.
And that's my (inflation-adjusted) 2 cents...
(in case you're wondering, the tickers are the stocks that I follow and use this site's analysis to work with...nothing to do (directly) with the article)
RSS Headlines
Fool UK