Set forth below is the text of a comment that I recently posted to the discussion thread for another blog entry at this site:
“We are all on the same side.”
Again, no we are not. When people stop talking to you, they are not on your side. All the major boards banned you. Wade stopped talking to you. Your wife divorced you. How much more evidence do you need before you accept the fact that no one is on your side.
I would need to see that Shiller was not able to get his research published in a peer-reviewed journal. I would need to see that he could not get his book picked up by a major publisher. I would need to see that he was not awarded a Nobel prize. I would need to see Wade Pfau conclude after spending 16 months researching my investing ideas that: “No, Virginia, Valuation-Informed Indexing doesn’t work!” I would need to see something less than thousands of our fellow community members express a desire that honest posting re the last 42 years of peer-reviewed research be permitted at every site. That sort of thing.
Rob
Wade doesn’t believe in VII. Read his books, look at what he has posted on the internet. Despite your allegations, he said he was never threatened by any goons, but was threaten by you when you said he might go to prison for not agreeing with you. Shiller also has rejected you. He has obviously seen posts from you as your name is all over the internet talking about him. He avoids you like the plague. You also don’t have these thousands of supporters because they don’t post here.
Every single person, including your ex-wife, has rejected you. Instead of accepting blame and admitting you are wrong, you just keep on repeating the same set of lies and then blame everyone else. It just isn’t working for you.
If you believed the things you are saying, you would work with me to open every site to honest posting re the last 42 years of peer-reviewed research with perfect confidence that Buy-and-Hold would prevail over Valuation-Informed Indexing in a civil and reasoned discussion. You saw how people reacted to the Valuation-Informed Indexing concept in the days before you were able to get bans imposed at the various sites. If Shiller’s Nobel-prize-winning research is able to win enough support to cause you to behave as you have behaved for the past 21 years, the millions of investors who want to be able to discuss it should be permitted to do so.
That’s where I am coming from re this one in any event.
My best wishes.
Rob
Shiller and his research is allowed. Pfau and his research is allowed. Your opinions is not “research”. What is not allowed is your poor behavior and that is why YOU are banned.
The only poor behavior that I am guilty of is that I said in my famous post from the morning of May 13, 2002, that the retirement study posted at John Greaney’s web site lacks an adjustment for the valuation level that applies on the day the retirement begins. Many community members reacted by saying that I had started the most important debate ever held at that forum. There was huge interest in the subject of how valuations affect safe withdrawal rates. Gresney didn’t like seeing that. He completely flipped out and sent his Goon Squad into action. I believe that, if he truly believed that he had included a valuation adjustment in the study, he never would have even formed a Goon Squad. He is the one guilty of poor bahvior for not correcting the study within 24 hours of the moment he leanred that he had made an error in it.
Anyway, that’s my sincere take. I naturally wish you all the best that this life has to offer a person regardless of what investment strategy you elect to follow.
Rob
No, your poor behavior is that you refuse to answer questions, you refuse to listen to others, you would often hijack threads, you make up claims of criminal activities, you misrepresent what other people say, and so forth. These are things that are very disruptive to a community. You know all this, yet still allege it is based on Greaney. That is just another example of your straight out dishonesty.
Hss the error in the study been corrected, Anonymous? It’s been 21 years. There were people at the Motley Fool board who used that study as guidance for crafting their retirement plans.
Why do I have the funny feeling that, if Greaney had corrected the study within 24 hours of when I advanced my post, there never would have been any problem?
Rob
And there is an example of what I just spoke of. You have been told that there was no error thousands of times.
And I’ve asked that it be corrected thousands of times.
Is that not so?
Rob
You just made my points. That is why people have grown tired of you. They don’t agree and shouldn’t have to tell you thousands of times.
Some agree. Some don’t.
The first 21 years of our discussions show that 90 percent of the population think that market timing is not required and 10 percent think that Shiller’s Nobel-prize-winning research is legitimate research. For Valuation-Informed Indexing to grow in popularity, we need to open every discussion board and blog to honest posting, That way people who begin having doubts about Buy-and-Hold can air their thinking and ask questions and eventually be persuaded of the merits of the recent research. That’s how Buy-and-Hold goes down over time and Valuation-Informed Indexing goes up over time. There’s no other way it could happen.
What you call “bad behavior” I call letting people know about the 42 years of peer-reviewed research showing that the investment strategy thag they have pinned their retirement hopes on is full of holes. Any site that does not permit honest posting re the last 42 years of peer-reviewed research lacks intergrity as a source of information re what works in stock investing. I view is as absolutely essential that every site permit honest posting, without a single exception.
My sincere take.
Rob
“ Some agree. Some don’t.”
Not some……no one. Look at what you posted. You admit to bring this up thousands of times. It is like the kid and the checkout counter asking his/her mother if they can have a candy bar and the mother has to tell them “no” multiple times. Now imagine that kid asking his/her mother the same question a thousand times. What is annoying at first, eventually becomes a behavior issue when the child refuses to listen to what they are told. You are the child that has been asking for that candy bar for the last 20 years.
You are not the mother of our discussion boards and blogs. It is the people who populate our communities who should get to decide what we will talk about.
http://www.passionsaving.com/investing-discussion-boards.html
Rob
“ You are not the mother of our discussion boards and blogs.”
The collective community has been having to take on the mother role because of your childish behavior. The investment community (that includes the board owners) decide what we talk about and they have spoken. These board owners have this right, just as you block people on this board.
If the site owners truly believed that honest posting re the past 42 years of peer-reviewed research should be banned, they would put language to that effect in their published site rules. They went along with bans only because the abusive behavior of the Buy-and-Hold Goon Squads threatened to destroy their sites. I was there.
I believe that a lot of people are going to see why it is important to pemit honest posting re the peer-reviewed research in the days following the onset of the next Buy-and-Hold Crisis. At that point, I believe that we may be able to persuade one site owner to stand up to you Goons. As people flood to that site as the only place offering sound investment advice, support for the idea of permitting honest posting re the research will spread.
Or so Rob Bennett sincerely believes, you know? We’ll see.
I naturally wish you all the best that this life has to offer a person in any event.
Rob