Hi tkc,
I see what you are saying and it makes sense to employ some kind of method to examine all aspects of a company.
It seems that some people are trying to make this a game of personalities again. I tend to categorize such posts in my Wave conversation quadrant into the "dumb and/or shallow and/or angry" corner. With a certain blur with the "trader and/or manipulator" quadrant as well.
What ho! A post deleted by the iHub Administrator.
"Hi TPT,
I'm not sure this board is usually meant to be about posters. But since a few people are introducing the integrity of some posters as a topic, I guess it is okay for me to make a comment too.
Wave has an opportunity. If it had no obstacles to its progress, it would have already become a large company. Unfortunately for long investors, those who have proposed caution regarding the timeline of adoption due to these obstacles have not been quite as wrong as those who demand and expect immediate gratification. So many of those undiluted optimists are gone now. Others have stayed and seem to hope the moment that Wave breaks through is some kind of justification for their inability to admit the existence of a brake all these years.
Oddly enough, I don't get the sense that the people whom I most respect and believe understand this space and its opportunity perceive those who offer cautions as negative. Rather the opposite. They know that there is a grand thesis which might be called the trust matrix. They tend to rise to the challenge of questions. Or they accept the risks as a legitimate part of the conversation.
But let me turn this around. Why do folks like yourself castigate those who are not relentlessly positive?
For myself, I view some of the people who are disinterested in Wave's obstacles to progress as lacking a certain sort of granular vision of the company and its opportunity. The timeline of growth is influenced by demand and by its absence and by its deferral. Getting a sense of these things matter to me and to others, probably, and we like to discuss it. But some folks can't see it or won't hear it. That's a pity for them.
Perhaps other people who cannot abide a caution or three have another purpose. It does not serve them that others stand in their way. After all, nothing I have written would hinder Wave's progress. So I guess there may be some kind of reason having to do with them personally.
Why should this be so?
It's a question of motive. For traders, I suppose cautions are problematic when they are long the stock and looking to boost the price so they can exit at the higher price which suits them. Indeed, I should not be too surprised to learn that some folks play this game both ways, with alternating characters depending on their ownership status. Are such people trustworthy, I wonder?
For those who have only a little insight but perhaps have a large view of their own talent, I guess contradiction is challenging and they cannot abide it.
Others simply have a long history of being unable to contain their aggressive side and end up excluded from most any place they've ever been. I guess there is also a history of resentment for such folks.
Lots of other reasons, I suppose.
So I just stick to my kind of posting, which looks at both opportunity and risk. It won't stop because certain folks only want to hear positives. I have a few friends I communicate with here, and I write for them and those who are interested to read what I have to say and not for everyone else. I suggest if you dislike the challenge of someone who has a different view, that you either move to a space which excludes that kind of conversation (there's a DD board for this kind of person), or that you manage your reading so as to ignore the folks who have positives and negatives to offer.
Hey, but I do know that being relentlessly positive is terrifically popular with folks. That's the ole potlatch effect for you."
I was interested to discover which poster presented this as a TOS violation. Tends to confirm the thesis.
| 