Post New

I don't post often but I have owned BRK stock since 1994 and lurk continuously. Over the years, we have developed "whipping boys" whose posts regularly receive very few, or no, recs, and are blocked by some altogether. The "whipped" poster usually finally disappears or tries to moderate his or her posts to become more accepted by the many. (One or two literally fight to the death. "Ghu" comes to mind.)

I think most would agree that hclasvegas could be categorized as one of those "whipped." I must confess that I, while I was lurking (but not "whipping") was among those who got angry over many of his posts and considered blocking him, and I actively did not rec him.

But I continued to lurk and to read his posts. To my pleasant surprise, during the past months I have discerned a notable change in their general tone. And when I reflect on the substance, not the style, of what he has said, more times than not, I find that I agree with the gist of his post and have begun to rec those posts. All this is to say that I am glad I didn't throw the baby out with the dishwater. I was too quick to judge and I apologize to hclasvegas.

To that end, I may not be alone. Four posts since midnight caught my attention today: 2 by rayvt (##15102 and 15106), and 2 by hclasvegas ("hclv") (##15105 and 15110). (I don't know either poster except on the BRK Boards.)

Raytv's Post #15102 discusses rechargeable batteries and pacemakers and has 2 recs until now. Hclv's Post #15105 discusses wealth and taxes and has no recs.

Less than 2 hours after hclv's Post #15105, raytv responded to #15105 with Post #15106: "This [Post #15105} should be on the U.S. Policy Board." As I write, raytv's Post #15106 has received 8 recs, all implictly agreeing that hclv's Post #15105 should not appear on the BRK Board.

REALLY??? Aren't the subjects of wealth and taxes both of vital importance to BRK corporately and to each of us individually? Or are we just trying to emphasize how much we dislike hclv? Don't each of these subjects, wealth and taxes, directly impact the reasons we are all here? Have I been missing something all these years (please don't answer this in writing)?

Finally, less than 45 minutes after raytv's Post #15106, hclv responded to it, kind of sharply, but very civilly (Post #15110): "This is your post and you suggest a post about wealth and taxes in America is off topic, lol. Google who Warren Buffett is. bye bye."

Now, over 6 hours after hclv's Post #15110, he has 1 rec, mine. While I know that BRK owns a battery manufacturer that may provide a direct link to BRK for board conversation, it's not a far reach, at least for me, to conclude that at least a portion of raytv's upvotes are submitted, not FOR the message, but AGAINST the person to whom the message is directed.

Today's target, hclv, doesn't need my defense. Nor should he feel alone. Several have been targeted through the years. But today's perceived injustice caught my lurking eye. I just think we are better than this and wanted to say so. My 2 cents.

I tend to agree. Even if a poster annoys you, and even if you think a post is off base, they can raise a very interesting subject.

And besides, face it, without at least the occasional off topic post this place is pretty boring. It's a Berkshire community, but both words are important.

Jim

Over the years, we have developed "whipping boys" whose posts regularly receive very few, or no, recs, and are blocked by some altogether. The "whipped" poster usually finally disappears or tries to moderate his or her posts to become more accepted by the many.


I respectfully disagree with your characterization. First, not recommending a post can hardly be called 'whipping' someone; second, the idea of people becoming 'whipping boys' implies that their punishment is through no fault of their own. People who get tickets because they have driven through an interesection when the light was red are not whipping boys, they are being punished for dangerous or objectionable behaviour. If they change their behaviour as a result, so much the better, that is the purpose of the punishment.

I for one do not recommend hclv's posts because I have him on ignore, and good riddance. I haven't been particularly bothered by rayvt's posts, but looking at the last 20 on the Berkshire board, they almost all have practically nothing to do with Berkshire, so I may eventually ignore those, too. It is true that there is indeed a notion of a Berkshire community, and members of that community should not be expected to always talk only about Berkshire, but as far as I'm concerned, to be in that community, you should occasionally have SOMETHING to say about Berkshire. If the signal to noise ratio is zero, sor close to it, the ignore feature works for me. Life is too short to put up with needless distractions!

Regards, DTB

There is no justice when it comes to the number of recs. Sharp elbows tend to get recs. Deep philosophical insights that other have missed are often met by the sound of crickets.

Post with recs get read, which means they get even more recs. Mundane posts by popular posters get more recs because more people read their posts in the first place. Great posts by lessor known posters don't get as many recs because people don't read them. And different factions seem to evolve. Post A has a viewpoint that people rec, and Poster B has different viewpoint whose supporters automatically rec. These little rec-battles can last years across various topics.

So, no justice. Don't look for it, it doesn't exist. But over time the cream does tend to rise to the top. Posters who consistently get a lot of recs usually have stuff worth reading. That said, you can't spend recs and they don't pay dividends. There is no prize for having lots of recs. So don't worry about the rec count too much. It doesn't matter.

One thing I've been debating about saying, and despite my better judgement I'll just toss it in: Jim gets a lot of recs. Easily number one on the non-political boards, and that's been true for probably two decades. It is not a conspiracy. His posts are interesting, so people read them. And you have to read them in order to rec them. It is a self-reinforcing cycle. But over the years a few people have gotten absolutely bent that they don't get as many recs as he does.

I feel like we've watched at least two psychotic breaks happening in real time as posters can't make their rec count match Jim's. It is wild. They are just recs. No one is actually counting. Not worth losing your marbles over.

philmordun, first of all, thanks for your post. Now let's see how much my computer skills have grown, since I'm not on my cell.

" (One or two literally fight to the death. "Ghu" comes to mind.)"
You hit a nerve there, ghu and I chatted privately very often. He was older than me, so I assume he passed. He was a very sweet guy and was abused and disrespected by the usual clowns in fools Ville. RIP if he passed.

I know for a fact that on the old yahoo and fools boards several wise guys used at least 5 IDS EACH or more to rec their own posts and even comment themselves on their own posts. I have no idea if that is policed on this board or if the usual suspects, can still use multiple IDS.

Many years ago, Jim aka mungo was kind enough to warn me that a group on the fools board was acting in concert to have me removed from the Fools boards if I kept questioning Buffett and his actions etc. Back then I was pounding the table for Buffett to make shareholder friendly moves. I wanted the stock split, buybacks authorized at material discounts to IV, brk to acquire the right of first refusal on all GATES F sales etc. You might remember better than me what other suggestions I had back then.

Just so you know, I never left the Fools board, jim was correct, the gang had the Fools take away my posting privileges and I was banned from the Fools boards. Even today I'm still in private contact with many of the sharpest old posters who refuse to post on the boards they weren't banned, they left voluntarily. At one point the gang got so out of line I went to the local police and friends at the FBI. There are certain things you shouldn't do or say on these sites. A few of the old gang are very active on the US Policy board. If you want a few good laughs go check out the brka yahoo board. There are a few guys on that board who still use many IDS to pollute that board, they have been doing it for over 20 years. Seriously. In 2009 an old friend who took serious abuse on the old gaming boards passed away, unhappy and very depressed, a few old timers here know who he was. He posted mainly on the AZR board before AZR was taken over. I'll leave it at that.

My gfriend forced me to learn how to type and use the computer in like 2000, prior to that I dictated to her, secretaries I had over the years etc. I never claimed to have great secretarial skills, lol. Feel free to contact me privately if you wish, I can fill in some of the spaces. To be honest I thought the FOOLs might get sued one day and I was hoping to add value to the lawyers representing the class but to my knowledge lawsuits never happened. I hope our gracious host has some type of disclaimer that we all sign off on that he is not responsible for the content, behavior, actions resulting from posts on these boards etc. I must have 10 people on ignore so who knows what children might post that I don't see. I know how to ignore others but if there is a way to prevent others from seeing my posts, it's above my paygrade. I better send this before I accidently delete it, take care, and thanks for the kind thoughts.

a group on the fools board was acting in concert to have me removed from the Fools boards ..... At one point the gang got so out of line I went to the local police and friends at the FBI.

At what time around was that?

Asking because I was on TMF since around 2000 and seems to have missed that completely, only remember the "battles" with Ghu, with my beloved Datasnooper (was that maybe on the MI board instead?), and much later with Divvi and the other guy.

“ At what time around was that?“ Good morning, I would bet on Jim’s memory over mine or the stable genius. I never voluntarily stopped posting, I was banned, so if you recall me disappearing I was 86 by the fools. Btw, you would be shocked at who contacted me privately to stop questioning Buffett’s moves. Guys who were managing serious money couldn’t even agree that Buffett should have authorized a buyback at material discounts to IV ten years earlier. Do you recall me begging him to stop buying and promoting ibm and to buyback Brk instead for years? Ginny missed for over 20 quarters in a row Buffett sure has patience. Many ibm fans in Brkville were not happy with my opinion of loading up on ibm back then.

A month or two ago a poster did a very deep dive into Jim’s posts from many years ago. I don’t have the skills to do that to myself. I would pay that guy to do that for me. Look for the FSFE posts, foundation sales forever effect posts,tho it should have been, affect, lol, and what I suggested back then to help absorb the foundation selling. Also, poster toddfinance responses for my calls to split the As. Todd was always a gentleman, but he insisted that a pizza is a pizza regardless if you cut it into 4,8 or 16 slices. He couldn’t understand that the split would provide the liquidity necessary to be included in the major indexes. The good old days. I have no idea if the Fools deleted all my posts? Thanks .

...and much later with Divvi and the other guy.

Kingran

HC, you've got another book to write. Canseco did it with steroids and you can do it with message boards. I say go for it!

This is an investment board, not a political board. I don't understand why they would ban you.

I never suggested that Brk should be a high yielder. I know for a fact that globally there are investors, funds, institutions etc that can not or will not buy a non dividend paying stock. Now that Apple, meta, Goog, etc pay a small dividend it’s very obvious I was correct 20 years ago. A small dividend would have increased demand for brk. Perhaps Apple, Mets, and Goog are all stupid but I doubt it. Buffett can be very anal with respect to tax avoidance. He was willing to watch his life’s work sold via the foundations at or slightly above book for many years. He gave away a portion of his life’s work much to cheap. An authorized buyback at material discounts to IV and a very small dividend in 2004 or so would have increased demand for the common ,period. Why did the bullies and goons want me off the fools board? Several were managing money, and still do , they didn’t want anyone to question Buffett’s wisdom or brilliance. A few of the most vicious dangerous fools were jealous that our group of private investors in a private chat group excluded them for various reasons. I spent a lot of time trying to convince ghu to stop posting and to delete the fools app, he wouldn’t listen. Sweet guy who was sharper then half the clowns posting back then, believe me. Too bad he let the goons get to him. Hey jad are you out there? Sent from my cell phone, read at your own risk.

Now that Apple, meta, Goog, etc pay a small dividend it’s very obvious I was correct 20 years ago. A small dividend would have increased demand for brk.

I think it's entirely reasonable to believe that and express it. You might even be right. But I think it's inappropriate to claim that there is evidence that you have been correct about that.

For one things, there is some very strong evidence to the contrary, even in this thread: the introduction of a dividend after a long period without one is a firm and loud declaration to the market that you are ex growth, which is why so many shareholders on the board dread the day. Look at what happened to Microsoft stock when they started. (dead money for years, to overgeneralize)

Strictly speaking the first introduction of a dividend should be interpreted as being the situation that you can't invest all your available capital at high returns any more, but being able to invest lots of capital at high returns is perceived to be very similar to "what a growth company does". If Berkshire can't allocate lots of capital at good rates of return, the compounding machine is over, so the market beating rates of growth are over. That's not a press release, the day of capitulation, that Berkshire shareholders should look forward to.

Without compounding--investing new capital at pretty good rates--Berkshire is a very boring cash cow with pretty low returns. Even with all the capital allocated to operating units for capex and tuck-ins, the operating earnings have been on a pretty unexciting trajectory for a long time.

Jim

Why did the bullies and goons want me off the fools board? Several were managing money, and still do , they didn’t want anyone to question Buffett’s wisdom or brilliance.

I say you’re full of crap, I’ve read every post since 1998 on the old Berkshire board. Nobody tried to kick you off. How many times did you post on the yahoo chat “dancing girls won’t accept intrinsic value “.??? That was funny up to about the 500th time you penned it. Kind of like ghu, the same thing over and over and over again!!!

" I say you’re full of crap, I’ve read every post since 1998 on the old Berkshire board. Nobody tried to kick you off. "


Are you calling Jim a liar? I'll wait for your response before I put you on ignore thank you.

Every now and then an old timer reminds me of something so funny I have to tell the story for the new kids on the block.

20 plus years ago a market expert in foolsville told me, "Don't worry about the stock's price, just calculate what you think is IV, multiple that number by the number of brka shares I own, and that's my IV NET WORTH, that's what matters. I responded, will banks lend me money based on my IV net worth? Can I pay the kids college bills with IV net worth checks? Most importantly, I asked, if I visit the Chicken Ranch or Crazy Horse, will the dansin girls take IV net worth checks from me? That didn't offend Hbird, that's all that mattered to me, IF it offended anyone why not put me on iggy 25 years ago?

Did anyone but me inform the guy that computing my IV net worth was ridiculous, of course not! I'm still about 20 percent brkb tho I'm short the calls, I wonder what my IV net worth is today?

yo, very stable genius, UCMTSU, thanks for decades of laughs old bud.


Perhaps that poster is right, maybe I should write a book, brkvilles greatest posts, and my responses to them, but I have no idea if the fools deleted all my posts?

Some of you would be shocked at who posted on that Fools board, reached out privately and how much AUM they had.

Post New

Berkshire Hathaway FAQ

---

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.