Sharechat Logo

Forum Archive Index - June 2004

Please note usage of the Forum is subject to the Terms & Conditions.

Messages by Date [ Next by Date Previous by Date ]
Messages by Thread [ Next by Thread Previous by Thread ]
Post to the Forum [ New message Reply to this message ]
Printable version

Re: [sharechat] Phaedrus - Classic Hogwash - not really

From: Phyllis Bergquist <>
Date: Tue, 01 Jun 2004 08:28:09 +1200

Lazy Haggis,
If we were to examine and take on board the wisdom of each contributor on sharechat and comment
thus we open ourselves to a great deal of of broader knowledge.
I am far from being an expert and I trundle along taking on a bit more with every thing I read.
I develop slowly.
Phaedrus uses a method which puts an entry at a certain point.    This certain point could be
for a short term trade or a long term trade and is a sccessful method.    Same exit points.
My disciplines improve and I am exploring gently another area which should reveal some
confirmation.    A walk in the path of Woody whom I miss here very much.
I reckon you are confident and successful and use a different path.    Congratulations.
And I am will closely watch the path of PNA.    You know a great deal about it.
Thank you very much
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lazy Haggis" <>
To: <>
Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2004 5:12 AM
Subject: [sharechat] Phaedrus - Classic Hogwash

> Re: [sharechat] PNA looking good?
> Phaedrus Wisdom >>> " I was loath to draw any conclusions. Your questions
> are simply red herrings, designed to draw discussion away from your false
> claims." <<<
> Phaedrus, unfortunately you did draw conclusions (see above based on your
> chart) and your reply clearly shows that you are loathe to answer my
> questions, not because they are red herrings, but simply because they expose
> the limitations of your analysis. The rest of your comments are waffle,
> because I did not raise any specific technical view, yet your very
> questionable response includes a specific technical view (your chart) which
> you deliberately chose in order to draw erroneous conclusions as though I
> had presented that chart myself. Shame on you Phaedrus, that's disgraceful.
> If you had submitted that same reply to my scenario "PNA looking good" at
> high school level as an effective response, you would unlikely have received
> more than 3 out of 10, and you know that only too well. It was a very poorly
> thought out effort, and you are quite capable of much better analysis than
> that. I have seen your past efforts.
> The reason you did not answer my questions were obvious. Depending on the
> various technical time slices chosen, there are different outcomes,
> typically uptrend or downtrend. It is also possible to have conflicting
> trends based on the type of technical analysis used. You selected your
> particular timeframe and chart analysis type because it conveniently served
> the purpose of concluding with your erroneous findings. Had you wished to
> conclude an uptrend result, you could have done so quite easily, and on
> increasing volume - you know that.
> You surprise me Phaedrus. Look closer at the volumes. Over the period
> encompassing the most recent internal turning points (MACD and RSI) as the
> price rose from 15.5 cents through 17 cents the volume increased. You and
> your findings are totally incorrect. Furthermore, your reply and comments
> are red herrings deliberately designed to deceive those who are not
> technically minded, and typically used as a smokescreen from idiots who
> self-appoint themselves to pedestals.
> To make matters worse Phaedrus, not only did you concoct an irrelevant
> technical view, you also totally ignored references to the US dollar chart,
> gold bullion chart, fundamental analysis, and the effect of other external
> factors such as terrorism, all of which effectively combine to produce the
> PNA technical view today - a classic buy.
> I am not prepared to enter any further debate on this matter with you, as my
> point has been clearly made, and anyone can look over those time periods at
> will, however if you feel better within yourself, then please feel free to
> post whatever you wish. I'm sure there will be plenty of people who believe
> your simplistic technical nonsense. Don't annoy me again with such trivia.
> Lazy Haggis
> The Mumbo Jumbo Filter
> _________________________________________________________________
> Watch LIVE baseball games on your computer with MLB.TV, included with MSN
> Premium!
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> To remove yourself from this list, please use the form at


Messages by Date [ Next by Date: Re: [sharechat] WRI battle warming up Robin Benson
Previous by Date: [sharechat] Gold - The only way to go. Lazy Haggis ]
Messages by Thread [ Next by Thread: Re: [sharechat] To Phaedrus re PNA Robin Benson
Previous by Thread: [sharechat] Phaedrus - Classic Hogwash Lazy Haggis ]
Post to the Forum [ New message Reply to this message ]