Yeah,,, welll ermmm uhh noooo uuhhhh kinda.

There's enough wiggle room there in that "Shunning" is sort of a "Non binding resolutionary" sort of an action.

There are things I'm absolutely for and absolutely against at the same time... I'm absolutely for smelling nice around the office and absolutely against smelling out loud.

I'm absolutely for arguing your case, and absolutely against being absolutely convinced that you're right (no matter what!).

I'm absolutely for people seing that I'm brilliant and absolutely against anyone taking my word instead of thinking for theirself (as if!).

I'm absolutely against Absolut! What they did to Michel Roux(?) was the crime of two centuries! That's why I never buy Absolut and would instead buy Stoli's... except that there are lots of new brands that don't taste either and cost less (true story, the other day I bought Poland Spring lite Vodka! The reason it was so cheap was that they watered down the vodka with Poland Spring brand water.)

[quote=Whomitmayconcer]

"Reread what I wrote until this message is clear:"

No need. I don't know how you grew up but, one thing I learned when I was a lad was that condensed milk didn't taste all that much like milk, but that doesn't mean it's not. I condensed the essence of what your speaking said. It doesn't taste like it did when you uttered it but it's basically what it boiled down to.

I'm not going to get into your twisted game of comparative, situational ethical "standards" (yes, you ought to recognize that those are mutually exclusive terms and that is exactly why they were placed together so you can see the fault of your "logic" when you apply them. Yes I know you are saying that you are arguing against situational ethics, but you are applying them in your own argument.) I'm not interested in having a discussion about Imus, Sharpton Jackson or Rutgers. The point was made for illustrative purposes, it was a valid point but focusing on it only serves to take the spotlight off the bigger point which is that you are overreacting.

Does not liking someone calling me a liar make me a victim?

No, but whining about it three weeks later certainly makes you appear as someone claiming victim status. And claiming that status in the very thread where one of the subtexts is victims, victimization and the victim class, and another subtext is hypocrisy and then you not seeing the hypocrisy of your own victimification is more ironic than a truckload of Geritol!

"I didn't realize that $154,000 was going to raise such a problem. Maybe, where you are from it's a big number, but for me, within my realm of experience, it's not."

If you might remember, I was right there saying that it was a very doable number. It's impressive, but I had no doubt that you could have done it.

The issue is not the number, the issue is you wrapping yourself in the swaddling cloth of your own righteous indignation that someone could actually doubt you. That you are so personally involved with electrons flashing on a screen that you can let someone's ungracious speech mean so much... Maybe a few weeks off is a good idea, for you.

As to your altruism...

The guy asked, "I am wondering what average production for an advisor in their first year is. Any idea?"

And you said: "That's a great question. Hopefully some recent trainees will step forward with their first year numbers. My first year was 23 years ago, or was it 24? My first year production was $154,000. Second year was $300,000+. I started with a small firm with only 101 trainees in the training program. By the end of year two I was the number two trainee in the firm. So my numbers were higher than average.

I can't relate my numbers to today's business, however I can tell you this:..."

That helped the guy how? It didn't answer his question, it just gave you an opportunity to whip it out and say "Ain't that a peach?" He asked what the average guy was doing today, not what you did 23 years ago.

"If you'd like we can take a poll here to see what the group thinks of that."

Go ahead Bette Davis take a poll!

"Yet you've clubbed me over the head with your complete misreading of my Imus posts, their content as well as intent. Is that the courtesy you speak of? "

Ahh, poor baby seal! I didn't misread it and if you're going to take a pole I think you know which one I'd suggest you start with!

"Good job, you lost me here. I am politely asking you to restate this using only one and two syllable words written at a sixth grade level so I can understand it. Note the courtesy."

The base of Solipsistic is Soli, solo, sole, one, soul, I. Solipsistic is essentially egocentrism (centered on one's own ego). You stated that you don't understand what I write, and yet, you don't ask me to explain. I've read many of your posts and they all seem to have one common denominator, they all start and end with YOU. They don't probe and they don't absorb, they lecture. This is why I say they are ego centric. You are not here for dialog, you are here to profess. You are here to declare that this is "what it is" if "it" isn't something that you said, then "it" isn't important to you (not important enough for you to ask for clarification).

"Reread what I wrote until this message is clear:..."

No, you reread what I wrote and what you wrote until YOU see that that your actions speak louder than your words.

[/quote]

WOW! I'm impressed! That you would go to such time and trouble to respond tells me that you really care or that I got under your skin and you can't practice what you preach.

I want to thank you for you definition of the solipsistic. As entertaining as it was to read, more entertaining to me is your assumption that I didn't know what it meant. Even your use of it as an adjective rather than the more common use as a noun didn't throw me. It was the convoluted sentence that came after that I was having trouble wrapping my mind around. However, I was puzzled that you capitalized solipsistic. I'm far from being the grammer police, being a drop out of the "Just Spell No" 12 step program, but I don't think that's right. Assuming that the word solipsistic was what I meant when I said you lost me, again the reading comprehension thing. Perhaps that you immediately assumed your vocabulary was better than mine points to your own solipsistic tendancies?

Whomit, I wish I could come back with example after example of your posts to  impune your good name as you've attempted to do with my post. The truth is, I don't read most of your stuff. You're just not on the list of people I seek out on this forum. The talking in circles and constant metaphors. I just don't have time. So usually I pass on your posts.

I leave you the last word.

I am politely asking you to restate this using only one and two syllable words written at a sixth grade level so I can understand it.

I think you have a writing comprehension issue. Forget reading comprehension!

"That you would go to such time and trouble to respond tells me that you really care or that I got under your skin and you can't practice what you preach."

I do care and I do practice what I preach. What I preach is adult interaction, communication. I DO think that you are an asset to this community. But that doesn't mean I shouldn't call you out when you're throwing a temper tantrum. 

As to passing by my posts, well then just keep in mind that I know alot more about you than you know about me. Your loss, my gain.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/solipsistic

BTW, solipsistic? Adjective. Sorry.

Perhaps they didn't go over suffixes until seventh grade?

" I wish I could come back with example after example of your posts to  impune your good name as you've attempted to do with my post."

Victim, victim, victim. What a drama queen!

[quote=Whomitmayconcer]

I am politely asking you to restate this using only one and two syllable words written at a sixth grade level so I can understand it.

I think you have a writing comprehension issue. Forget reading comprehension!

"That you would go to such time and trouble to respond tells me that you really care or that I got under your skin and you can't practice what you preach."

I do care and I do practice what I preach. What I preach is adult interaction, communication. I DO think that you are an asset to this community. But that doesn't mean I shouldn't call you out when you're throwing a temper tantrum. 

As to passing by my posts, well then just keep in mind that I know alot more about you than you know about me. Your loss, my gain.

Joe,

I can dig that...But.. what I don't quite understand is why you chose this particular post to highlight the issue.

The Bond guy tripped over his own foot in that he was the one who said "use only one and two syllable words" and then acted the vic by saying that I had just jumped to some pedantic, elitist conclusion by explaining what the mulitsyllabic word meant (which I normally assumed he would have understood in the first place or else I wouldn't have used it. That he whined that I must have thought he was vocabularally challenged when I defined it for him, shows again that he waves the victim flag in that he could just as easily have assumed that I assumed he was literate enough to understand the words.) 

Do I try too hard? Sometimes. I like to challenge myself. I don't know about you but I've been having these same conversations for nearly a decade now. I've known guys that can just spit out the same words in the same order a thousand times. Me, I hate saying the same thing twice (even though I do enjoy quoting myself, but I've gotten over that.)

I never know exactly where it's going to go, like the "Condensed milk" analogy, I didn't know at the begining that "uttered" was going to be there, nor did I realize that "what it boils down to" was coming. That's the fun of writing, if you don't have fun, what's the point?

"I'm all for elevating the level of our discourse, but if people can't understand what you're trying to say it doesn't matter how profound the thought may be."

That's the art of conversation, making a statment that allows others to make comment and or ask for clarification. That's how the level of discourse gets raised, by intelligent, interesting and interested people trading related commentary; it's the difference between conversing and pontificating.

Key words:  "allow others to make comment".  It's called FREEDOM of speech ...and you don't control this board. 

I'm also glad whomit isn't joedatroublemakr. 

I understood and comprehended this perfectly:

Joe,

Not for nothing, but, you know what? YOU are IMHO one of the worst offenders.

You jump in on every fight and add your snark. You perpetuate the bickering at almost every opportunity.

what I don't quite understand is why you chose this particular post to highlight the issue

If it weren't this post/thread it would have to be another since you post in almost every thread.

That's the art of conversation, making a statment that allows others to make comment and or ask for clarification. That's how the level of discourse gets raised, by intelligent, interesting and interested people trading related commentary; it's the difference between conversing and pontificating.

You understand this on one level. I would like to see you practice it.  It seems that you post to show how much smarter you are than the rest of us schlubs. You would rather lecture than converse (at least that's how I see it)  Pontificating to inflate your own ego and refusing to address in a respectful manner the thoughts and opinions of those who disagree with you is not conversation or elevating the "discourse".  It is just so much hot air.

That's how the level of discourse gets raised, by intelligent, interesting and interested people trading related commentary; it's the difference between conversing and pontificating.

It is all about raising the level of conversation, which is a continuous process, not unlike the financial planning process itself. More recently, to quote from earlier in this thread:

the parody is not personal, rather, about the apparent ego that screen names aquire over time.

So, Bond Guy, maybe you irritate but mostly you are respectable, but it was never about your individual ego, rather, you are an important player who can help lead the ascent.

Don’t hate him 'cause he’s smarter than the rest of you.  At least he does bother to post here and he doesn’t attack someone just because they posted (don’t have to have his approval to post here whether you be a brokr or not); he might attack because of WHAT they post.

But if he does attack, it's just to elicit some intelligent, adult dialog as he did with mike butler and now with bond guy.

He flirts rather nice, too... but me thinks he is just an exhibitionist (a public "showoff"), if you will. 

[quote=goforbroke]

But if he does attack, it's just to elicit some intelligent, adult dialog as he did with mike butler and now with bond guy.

He flirts rather nice, too... but me thinks he is just an exhibitionist (a public "showoff"), if you will. 

[/quote]

Of course you do. I'm not surprised since I strongly suspect you are both sharing the same sock puppets.

Wow: I can see why you feel intimidated by whomit being so smart/clever: you seem to have space and measurement challenges like two full sized adults can fit into a "sock"... that's a good one.  The man could be 300 pounds and balding, wear supersized socks, live 5 states away but on a computer screen...I find him rather smart and yeah, sexy.  Got a problem with that babs. 

Cuse me, I need to run off to the gym, my sock is just a little too tight these days.

He could also be the son of a general, a former wirehouse manager and you all rolled up into one…<!–
var SymRealOnLoad;
var SymReal;

Sym()
{
window.open = SymWinOpen;
if(SymReal != null)
SymReal();
}

SymOnLoad()
{
if(SymRealOnLoad != null)
SymRealOnLoad();
window.open = SymRealWinOpen;
SymReal = window.;
window. = Sym;
}

SymRealOnLoad = window.onload;
window.onload = SymOnLoad;

//–>

I find him rather smart and yeah, sexy.  Got a problem with that babs

Actually, yes. You make me want to puke.  Seriously, (if you can be serious) how warped, desperate and socially handicapped does one have to be to find their own alter ego a sexual attraction.  If you aren't the same person with multiple personalities crapping all over this forum, then I strongly suggest you get out more and get some therapy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_sock_puppet

That's it.  Done with lunch. Gonna go make some money.

"If it weren't this post/thread it would have to be another since you post in almost every thread"

That's not true. I generally don't comment in many of the Rookies and Trainees forums, Nor do I spend a lot of time in What's up at firms (mostly because both of those folders are preoccupied with ED Jones topics). Not to say I never post there, but I'm relatively rare there.

I post in the election thread when I have something to say. I made an observation or two over in Imas[sic] and I'm certainly here, but that doesn't constitute almost every thread by any stretch of the imagination.

"You understand this on one level. I would like to see you practice it."

Which is what I just finished saying is what I do. I write in a style that allows for multiple observations.

This is not always a good thing, that's for sure (see, now this is one of those places where I'm interjecting a place wherefrom conversations can grow) in that it sometimes means that someone might take something that I've said and run away with it in a direction I don't want to go. This happens often especially if the "Victim" wants to deflect attention from the overarching theme. In the case of this thread, Bondguy  wanted to run with the Imus issue and never once dealt with the fact that what was being said was "You're overreacting."

Notice that he didn't answer the question of how he helped the guy by bragging about his own first year numbers. Instead he went on about capitalization.

" It seems that you post to show how much smarter you are than the rest of us schlubs.'

Do you really think that I think that you think I'm smarter than the rest of you schlubs? How stupid do you think I am?

I just treat you like intelligent adults, that's all, no more, no less. If you are intimidated, I'm sorry, it's not my intention to intimidate anybody (unless, of course, we're debating in which case, bets are off).

"You would rather lecture than converse (at least that's how I see it)"

Did you expect me to respond to your post? If you did then you expected me to converse. If you didn't then who is lecturing whom?

This is some sort of a logical trapdoor. I'm damned if I respond and damned if I don't respond. Well, I respond.  

"Pontificating to inflate your own ego and refusing to address in a respectful manner the thoughts and opinions of those who disagree with you is not conversation or elevating the 'discourse'."

You are right! Good thing I don't do that. My ego is plenty inflated enough by the wonderfullness that is me, I don't need to pump it up by pontification.

I do indeed address in a respectful manner the thoughts and opinions blah blah blah... But I reserve the right to hold fast to my opinions. I reserve the right to choose which questions I answer and which rhetorical dark alleys I stay out of. I reserve the right to call as I see it and give at least as good as I get (it's not my fault that some people just aren't as good at this as they would like to be. It's not my fault that I respond to someone's ball peen hammer with a wrecking ball, they'd hit me with a wrecking ball if they could, but the best they got is a ball peen hammer.)

You, for example made sport of my absolutism post, and I responded by making even more fun of it. So please don't say that I don't work towards conversation. It's just not true.

[quote=Whomitmayconcer]

I am politely asking you to restate this using only one and two syllable words written at a sixth grade level so I can understand it.

What it meant was keep it simple. I didn't want to have to dig out my dictionary, thesaurus, and secret decoder to read another five word answer stretched to 100 words wrapped in a metaphor orbiting an analogy. Sooner or later we've all got to do some gross.

I think you have a writing comprehension issue. Forget reading comprehension!

"That you would go to such time and trouble to respond tells me that you really care or that I got under your skin and you can't practice what you preach."

I do care and I do practice what I preach. What I preach is adult interaction, communication. I DO think that you are an asset to this community. But that doesn't mean I shouldn't call you out when you're throwing a temper tantrum. 

First, you may preach adult communication, but you fail miserably at communicating. And for a guy who preaches a "let it be brotha, it's only the internet" attitude you've gone to extradinary measures to explain and defend yourself here. You let nothing pass. You're down to name calling.

As to passing by my posts, well then just keep in mind that I know alot more about you than you know about me. Your loss, my gain.

More like lost time.

As for not answering the question why would I? You think $154K is all the production in the world. You believe I was bragging by bringing it up. Which I gotta tell ya, is pathetic. But here I'll give you an example of me bragging: I own a $400,000 motorhome. Now that's me bragging. Me making $60,000= not bragging. I own a $400,000 motorhome=me bragging. See the difference?

[quote=babbling looney]

I find him rather smart and yeah, sexy.  Got a problem with that babs

Actually, yes. You make me want to puke.  Seriously, (if you can be serious) how warped, desperate and socially handicapped does one have to be to find their own alter ego a sexual attraction.  If you aren't the same person with multiple personalities crapping all over this forum, then I strongly suggest you get out more and get some therapy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_sock_puppet

That's it.  Done with lunch. Gonna go make some money.

[/quote]

I thought a sock puppet was something an adolescent boy made a mess in and had to hide from his mom. I'm not kidding. I didn't realize that it was what a lot of the kids do on this board.

[quote=Bobby Hull][quote=babbling looney]

I find him rather smart and yeah, sexy.  Got a problem with that babs

Actually, yes. You make me want to puke.  Seriously, (if you can be serious) how warped, desperate and socially handicapped does one have to be to find their own alter ego a sexual attraction.  If you aren't the same person with multiple personalities crapping all over this forum, then I strongly suggest you get out more and get some therapy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_sock_puppet

That's it.  Done with lunch. Gonna go make some money.

[/quote]

I thought a sock puppet was something an adolescent boy made a mess in and had to hide from his mom. I'm not kidding. I didn't realize that it was what a lot of the kids do on this board.

[/quote]

Me too. Thanks babs, very enlightening.

"I thought a sock puppet was something an adolescent boy made a mess in and had to hide from his mom. I'm not kidding. I didn't realize that it was what a lot of the kids do on this board."

Hey Bobby, you must go through a lot of 6-packs of socks eh? Dont really feel like wearing 'em after a pleasant night by your lonesome...

I can just imagine it... BH out on the town at some dive bar in Southside Chicago, trolling to take home some overweight divorced pig with 9 teeth missing. Buying her Pabst Blue to get her nice and in the mood... AHHH. You truly are living the High Life... (the predictable mother comment is probably gonna come along in about 3... 2... 1... seconds...)...