Several weeks ago, the trading category was leading the NTR category by over 400 topics. Now the lead is less then 200.
With dozens of commodities, hundreds of stocks and bonds, indices, etc., it seems odd that NTR is gaining at all ... let alone so rapidly.
It's not one of President Trump's campaign promises, so I feel comfortable in giving him most of the indirect credit for it.
Very astute observation Carl!
I remember back when we celebrated post 1,000!
Make that THREAD 1,000 for trading posts.
Carl,
That's a pretty classy Trump "dig".
Well done.
John
I've always felt the Category Count was a bit misleading. It counts threads, not posts.
So, a thread that has the initial post and no response adds 1, while an initial post with 100 responses also counts as 1.
A post count would likely increase both categories buy a factor of at least 10. The initial post in this thread is number 21,872. Assuming they started the address counter at 1, by now we've probably had in excess of 22k posts in the new format. or 18K+ more posts than the count would indicate.
Tim, for some reason, your post reminds me of our Electoral College discussions.
Shouldn't the single post thread get as much of a "vote" as a thirty post thread ?
Well, let's evaluate the point of counting.
Are we using the numbers of posts to determine which thread will be the commander in chief of the forum? One thread that will have authority over all other threads?
In such a case, would you prefer a moronic NTR post started with a reference to RawStory that generated 1,000 responses have authority over all other threads?
Or would you prefer 10 TR posts with intelligent market analysis but only 10 responses each have authority over all other threads?
Good points, Tim. Do you still think that New Mexico and California should have the same power in the Senate ?
As the senate was originally designed to function, and as it should function today, absolutely. As an extension of the house, as it is functioning, probably not.
The house was meant to be the representative branch. The senate was intended to protect states rights.
As the Founding Fathers, and Forum Founders, intended.
Here I am, back one day, and already violating my personal rule about debating. Please forgive me for being full of it.
Nothing wrong with civil debate. I would not discourage anyone from that...
My objec1ion to debate is that it is an exersize in futility, since no one can win. No one will change their mind.
Edited to eliminate double posting.
If the only objective of debate is to change minds, then most of the time, it's an exercise in futility. But it's also a way to exchange information, see another point of view, and learn.