The Lemon Fool

melonfool wrote:

Lootman wrote:There's also a clear policy of trying to depersonalise boards to make them more about the topic and less about any one person. Such a discussion should not offend anybody, nor should anyone seek to censor or suppress it.

That's not been my reading of what has been proposed. In fact, it has been proposed that boards have their own moderators/owners so quite the opposite to what you say is "a clear policy" - can you direct us to where you have seen that "clear policy" (other than where you suggested it)?

There was definitely a statement by one of the two sponsors that they did not think there was room for "personality" boards like some of the ones you mentioned. My search skills here aren't up to scratch yet so I can't cite it. But it's certainly been the practice so far, except for the Beerpig board anyway.

melonfool wrote:(we'll just have to trust people only use one log in and vote only once, won't we?

I believe that TMF had a rule was that you can only use one account at a time, so cheating on polls as you suggest was banned and I would assume here too.

melonfool wrote:But, until that is done - I can see zero reason the board should not carry on as it always had done.

We know that YOU see no reason to change. But others do. Are you saying no such discussion should take place because of your personal preference?

Lootman wrote:
Don't worry, you'll get the credit that is due to you for your contributions. But, to be blunt, this place isn't just about you, and there are some people here who were practising many of these ideas before you came along. So please tone down the rhetoric and dismissive characterisations, and be open to a broader array of ideas and input.

The problem is that I still don't think there is a consensus on what 'HYP' means. So in this specific instance I think a board that is named 'pyad HYP' is justified. Then the mod (pyad?) could nudge non PYAD straying posts back on course. A pyAD HYP seems to be fairly well defined?

IMHO this thread's squabbling has achieved nothing except show the confusion over who owns the term 'HYP'.

'High Yield Practical' and 'High Yield Strategies' mean nothing to me. What about practical strategies for non-PYAD HYPs? (Assuming that HYP can be used in the context of a non pYaD portfolio.) Where do they go?

The venerable stooz and Clariman need to define/agree terms and construct a sensible High Yield Investment Boards structure.

Stonge wrote:The venerable stooz and Clariman need to define/agree terms and construct a sensible High Yield Investment Boards structure.

Yes, it's their decision. But if they are not familiar with all the subtleties and nuances and history of HY boards, then they will need help with some of these fine details. A discussion such as this, where different ideas are presented, is useful feedback for them, I would have thought.

As to who moderates a HYP board, that could be a little contentious too, given the wars. But it won't be me, which should please some

Lootman wrote:I don't think I saw Clariman on the old HY boards. I suspect that anyone not well versed in the religious wars here can be forgiven for not realising that the difference between "HY Practical" and "HYP Practical" is something that would cause great ruptures, wailing and gnashing of teeth.

I'm pretty sure that I've read Clariman state that is not a fan of risk and will not invest in shares, so yes, I suspect he would not have spent much time hanging out on any of the TMF share boards.

I guess he is now realising just what he has been missing out on!

I just want to know where to post questions, thoughts, etc. without always finding myself in the wrong place

Terry.

Stonge wrote:

Lootman wrote:
Don't worry, you'll get the credit that is due to you for your contributions. But, to be blunt, this place isn't just about you, and there are some people here who were practising many of these ideas before you came along. So please tone down the rhetoric and dismissive characterisations, and be open to a broader array of ideas and input.

The problem is that I still don't think there is a consensus on what 'HYP' means. So in this specific instance I think a board that is named 'pyad HYP' is justified. Then the mod (pyad?) could nudge non PYAD straying posts back on course. A pyAD HYP seems to be fairly well defined?

IMHO this thread's squabbling has achieved nothing except show the confusion over who owns the term 'HYP'.

'High Yield Practical' and 'High Yield Strategies' mean nothing to me. What about practical strategies for non-PYAD HYPs? (Assuming that HYP can be used in the context of a non pYaD portfolio.) Where do they go?

The venerable stooz and Clariman need to define/agree terms and construct a sensible High Yield Investment Boards structure.

There is every consensus on what HYP means. Just look up the old Fool boards structure which worked okay as has been said here several times. There is no need to change it.

For the record the Fool HYP board was not a "pyad" board and frequently discussed topics like tinkering etc. which is outside of the way I run HYPs. In fact most of the postings in recent years appear to be from people who were not running a strict "pyad" HYP at all. Sure the board had its basis in my HYP strategy, in fact I founded it, but this broadened in time.

I have no interest in being a moderator. Almost all of my HYP time and work is for my own publication and its readers. Any posting I make here is just a secondary matter for me, not my primary medium of communication on the subject. I more or less gave up on the Fool years ago but with the new start here I thought I might try it out and see if I could become interested again because I do enjoy discussing the subject. But I can hardly believe we are even arguing the HYP/HYSS board thing at all cos it is just disinterring old arguments that were resolved years ago and worked just fine on the Fool. It's a compromise but it was a reasonably good one I think. As I said earlier if it aint broke...

pyad wrote:But I can hardly believe we are even arguing the HYP/HYSS board thing at all cos it is just disinterring old arguments that were resolved years ago and worked just fine on the Fool. It's a compromise but it was a reasonably good one I think. As I said earlier if it aint broke...

I believe it was in 2008 that the debates reached the pinnacle of rhetorical excess, and the HY board was split into two. I can't say for certain because I was having one of my TMF sabbaticals at the time, but have seen references to that.

Anyway, when I returned from my sabbatical, there were two boards but I would not say that everything was "resolved". In fact the debates went on and people differed. Some debates migrated over to the "Civil Discussion" meta-board and in fact one quite recently.

I think it's true to say that the split made some people who were formerly unhappy somewhat happier. But I cannot recall a time when there wasn't some tension between, as someone put it recently, "pure HYP" and "dirty HYP".

Which is not to say that I disagree with the idea of a theory board and a practical board. And indeed that is how it has been set up here. But the idea that the debate is over is clearly not the case. And it is in the nature of such things that opinions and perceptions and practices never get frozen in aspic - they constantly evolve.

Well that didn't take long... the old HYP board definition debate. Yawn.

Degsy

Degsy67 wrote:Well that didn't take long... the old HYP board definition debate.

Since this is a new location with no pre-existing definitions and a much smaller set of boards, there will naturally be work and discussions involved in establishing the new framework. Other boards are going through exactly the same thing e.g.

viewtopic.php?f=50&t=259

OK, so if the split adopted by people on the old Fool is adopted is it fair to summarise it as follows:

High Yield - HYP Practical: Covers matters relating to the running a high yield portfolio broadly complying with the PYAD rules, for example selecting top up shares.

High Yield - Strategies: Covers any other discussion in relation to a high yield portfolio, including by definition discussion of portfolios that do not broadly follow the PYAD rules. This would include, for example, portfolios which incorporate fixed interest elements and collective investments.

Is this correct? If not how should the split be explained for those, like me, who were not around for all the previous debates?

Terry.

+1 Lootman.

This could be the absolute best financial (and lifestyle) website in the UK.

I don't think it's going to be possible to port across all the TMF boards. Why would you want to? So although this owes a debt to TMF, it shouldn't be ruined by slavish adherence to its obsolete mores and structures.

I'm not saying it's easy, but if members can't be bothered to discuss these issues, I think the site will be much poorer than it could be.

Degsy, do you really not see the enormous additional potential of this site?

Wizard wrote:OK, so if the split adopted by people on the old Fool is adopted is it fair to summarise it as follows:

High Yield - HYP Practical: Covers matters relating to the running a high yield portfolio broadly complying with the PYAD rules, for example selecting top up shares.

High Yield - Strategies: Covers any other discussion in relation to a high yield portfolio, including by definition discussion of portfolios that do not broadly follow the PYAD rules. This would include, for example, portfolios which incorporate fixed interest elements and collective investments.

Is this correct? If not how should the split be explained for those, like me, who were not around for all the previous debates?

Terry.

Well, in the other place there were some FAQs, http://boards.fool.co.uk/faq-the-purpos ... 48855.aspx I'd say now would be a good time for a revamp but they'd give a good starting point. The strategy board could anything equities related with a high yield bent. The practical board relates to those specific HYP as understood to have a particular meaning above a portfolio of high yield assets.

I'd like somewhere to discuss the method of investing I use which is based upon the traditional pyadic HYP. Investing for a growing income using mostly large caps, looking for safety factors, long even indefinite holding periods, direct diversified share holdings of above average yield. We can share, but clear understanding of what HYP means is missing it seems.

Wizard wrote:OK, so if the split adopted by people on the old Fool is adopted is it fair to summarise it as follows:

High Yield - HYP Practical: Covers matters relating to the running a high yield portfolio broadly complying with the PYAD rules, for example selecting top up shares.

High Yield - Strategies: Covers any other discussion in relation to a high yield portfolio, including by definition discussion of portfolios that do not broadly follow the PYAD rules. This would include, for example, portfolios which incorporate fixed interest elements and collective investments.

Is this correct? If not how should the split be explained for those, like me, who were not around for all the previous debates?

Terry.

Yes - I think this is broadly correct.

I've learnt enough.
I don't see this discussing actual shares.