Remove ads

Introducing the LemonFools Personal Finance Calculators

HYP Purity (or, when does an HYP become not an HYP?)

Raise issues with Admin (Stooz, Clariman, Redsturgeon) e.g. alert to something important on the site or ask Admin about a moderation decision. You will be answered, but there is no response time guarantee.
moorfield
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1399
Joined: November 7th, 2016, 1:56 pm
Has thanked: 278 times
Been thanked: 312 times

HYP Purity (or, when does an HYP become not an HYP?)

#189697

Postby moorfield » December 28th, 2018, 12:45 pm

MDW's post on Bree's HYPish Portfolio thread states that reporting of "95% pure-HYPs" is permissible on HYP Practical. Since this was written under the "[mod]" tag I'm assuming all mods are supportive of it.

MDW1954 wrote:By my calculations, Bree's posted HYP is 95% pure-HYP. For me, that's near enough, although I accept that some may disagree. Removing the offending share from the calculations wouldn't be the end of the world, and neither would leaving it in.


To be accurate, Bree's portfolio can be said to be 95.1% by capital, and 93.4% by income, "pure-HYP". (Taking the lower income figure, and appropriating the Gold standard, one might say Bree's is a "22.4 carat" HYP!)

That thread implies that a certain amount of "impurity" can be tolerated in reporting on HYP Practical. So I'd like to ask mods to debate what that might be, and to deal with it explicitly in the Board Guidance? If anything, I think it would help mods themselves avoid a lot of "refereeing time" in future. And to be clear, I am not trying to wind mods up here, but rather to contribute constructively to the evolution of LF.

I would suggest both capital and income should exceed a certain level. On that measure, "95%" looks a little arbitrary and wouldn't quite qualify Bree's income number.

dspp
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2802
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 10:53 am
Has thanked: 2024 times
Been thanked: 590 times

Re: HYP Purity (or, when does an HYP become not an HYP?)

#189706

Postby dspp » December 28th, 2018, 1:13 pm

We use our discretion on all matters.

Please do not try to push us into giving hard numbers or hard limits, or else the answer will inevitably reduce discretion.

regards, dspp

MDW1954
Lemon Slice
Posts: 533
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 8:46 pm
Has thanked: 100 times
Been thanked: 101 times

Re: HYP Purity (or, when does an HYP become not an HYP?)

#189709

Postby MDW1954 » December 28th, 2018, 1:22 pm

As the moderator responsible for the "95%" remark, let me add to what dspp has posted.

First, it was intended to be a pragmatic solution to a specific situation. Second, it was not intended to be prescriptive for all (or any) future situations. And third, it was a judgement call based on the parameters of Bree's own portfolio. If, instead of one non-HYP holding, he had had ten non-HYP shares in it, but in small holdings that still totalled circa 5%, then I might have reached a different conclusion.

So let's leave things as dspp has suggested, and move on.

MDW1954

tjh290633
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2939
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:20 am
Has thanked: 196 times
Been thanked: 934 times

Re: HYP Purity (or, when does an HYP become not an HYP?)

#189714

Postby tjh290633 » December 28th, 2018, 1:46 pm

Ashfordian wrote:
dspp wrote:We use our discretion on all matters.

Please do not try to push us into giving hard numbers or hard limits, or else the answer will inevitably reduce discretion.

regards, dspp


From the board guidance, it's all hard numbers/limits and little discretion at all.

For the HYP Practical board we define an HYP as a portfolio comprised exclusively of ordinary shares. If selected, such shares should have a dividend yield above the average for the FTSE100 index and be drawn from the constituents of the FTSE 350 index. At its simplest, it will have at least 15 holdings, none of which should be from the same sector. A long term buy and hold (LTBH) of these shares is envisaged.


Quite simply, the mods are being eaten by their own cooking on this and all you are doing is creating further animosity towards experienced and knowledgeable posters, for which this site depends on to maintain itself and grow.

You are getting criticism, correctly IMO because we know how valuable a site like this can be from our TMF days but we can also see how you are strangling innovation.

I think that you are confusing the selection rules for new holdings with what happens to a portfolio after LTBH.

The market will decide what happens to any one share in the portfolio. Some may grow rapidly, some may fall rapidly, some may be taken over or demerged. Nowhere does it specify rigidly what to do in the light of events. Each individual can decide what limits to place on any parameter, be that weight, yield, share of income, or whatever. He or she can also decide what action, if any, to take. This is what is meant by portfolio management.

That brings us to tinkering or trading. Adjustments to the portfolio to keep it within the owner's choice of parameters, or to reinvest cash arising, are not trading as conventionally understood. Buying shares to get capital gain and selling when the target has been reached, is definitely trading. Selling a holding which has fallen below an acceptable yield level, to replace it with a higher yielding share, comes under the portfolio management heading.

None of this is prescribed by the guidelines, which merely provide guidance on the criteria for initial selection. Everything else is optional.

TJH

moorfield
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1399
Joined: November 7th, 2016, 1:56 pm
Has thanked: 278 times
Been thanked: 312 times

Re: HYP Purity (or, when does an HYP become not an HYP?)

#189719

Postby moorfield » December 28th, 2018, 1:58 pm

Ashfordian wrote:Quite simply, the mods are being eaten by their own cooking on this and all you are doing is creating further animosity towards experienced and knowledgeable posters, for which this site depends on to maintain itself and grow.


Honestly I'm not. I'm interested in trying to quantify what I think has always been a too subjective and ragged boundary around HYP. In that respect, yes (i) I am perhaps guilty of bringing too much of the day job here (I work in risk management, testing VaR, actuarial models etc. - which probably shows...) and (ii) HYP was probably never aimed at me (or many others here) anyway ...

I'll be posting my update on moorfield HYRP next week (note, not moorfield HYP, but perhaps I should resurrect that one after all ... :? ), and am then going to have a year off flounce I think. See you in 2020.

redsturgeon
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3994
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:06 am
Has thanked: 379 times
Been thanked: 652 times

Re: HYP Purity (or, when does an HYP become not an HYP?)

#189721

Postby redsturgeon » December 28th, 2018, 2:00 pm

Moderator Message:
This topic has been moved here from the Biscuit Bar but it should not be used to start yet another circular argument on what does or does not constitute a "legal" HYP.

Also I have deleted the post from Ashfordian that uses this thread as an excuse to bash the moderators yet again. (I have left the quoted passages in the reply to it in place)

The moderators on HYP boards in particular do a thankless job that tries to run the very thin line of keeping all sides in this debate happy. Posters who pop into any thread they can, merely to complain about the well intentioned actions of volunteer moderators display a lack of charity that is out of kilter with the season of goodwill and the general ethos of this site.

The OPs questions have been dealt with now let's move on.

absolutezero
Lemon Slice
Posts: 404
Joined: November 17th, 2016, 8:17 pm
Has thanked: 13 times
Been thanked: 69 times

Re: HYP Purity (or, when does an HYP become not an HYP?)

#189739

Postby absolutezero » December 28th, 2018, 3:24 pm

tjh290633 wrote:That brings us to tinkering or trading. Adjustments to the portfolio to keep it within the owner's choice of parameters, or to reinvest cash arising, are not trading as conventionally understood. Buying shares to get capital gain and selling when the target has been reached, is definitely trading. Selling a holding which has fallen below an acceptable yield level, to replace it with a higher yielding share, comes under the portfolio management heading.

None of this is prescribed by the guidelines, which merely provide guidance on the criteria for initial selection. Everything else is optional.

TJH

Surely if a share rises in value so much that its yield becomes suitable for getting rid of it and its subsequent replacement with a better yielder, then that is trading and not management!
Moderator Message:
This topic has been moved here from the Biscuit Bar but it should not be used to start yet another circular argument on what does or does not constitute a "legal" HYP.

Also I have deleted the post from Ashfordian that uses this thread as an excuse to bash the moderators yet again. (I have left the quoted passages in the reply to it in place)

The moderators on HYP boards in particular do a thankless job that tries to run the very thin line of keeping all sides in this debate happy. Posters who pop into any thread they can, merely to complain about the well intentioned actions of volunteer moderators display a lack of charity that is out of kilter with the season of goodwill and the general ethos of this site.

The OPs questions have been dealt with now let's move on.

I don't think it's a clear cut case of mod bashing, as you seem to think.
In fact, quash that one right away, I will put my money where my mouth is: I'm very happy to become a volunteer mod for a couple of weeks.
Want to take me up on my offer?

redsturgeon
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3994
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:06 am
Has thanked: 379 times
Been thanked: 652 times

Re: HYP Purity (or, when does an HYP become not an HYP?)

#189741

Postby redsturgeon » December 28th, 2018, 3:33 pm

absolutezero wrote:I don't think it's a clear cut case of mod bashing, as you seem to think.
In fact, quash that one right away, I will put my money where my mouth is: I'm very happy to become a volunteer mod for a couple of weeks.
Want to take me up on my offer?


It's not my call but happy to forward your offer to stooz and Clariman.

BTW I was not accusing you of "mod bashing".

John

absolutezero
Lemon Slice
Posts: 404
Joined: November 17th, 2016, 8:17 pm
Has thanked: 13 times
Been thanked: 69 times

Re: HYP Purity (or, when does an HYP become not an HYP?)

#189743

Postby absolutezero » December 28th, 2018, 3:40 pm

redsturgeon wrote:
absolutezero wrote:I don't think it's a clear cut case of mod bashing, as you seem to think.
In fact, quash that one right away, I will put my money where my mouth is: I'm very happy to become a volunteer mod for a couple of weeks.
Want to take me up on my offer?


It's not my call but happy to forward your offer to stooz and Clariman.

BTW I was not accusing you of "mod bashing".

John

Granted, you didn't accuse me of anything.
Though given I have been very active these last few days in expressing my frustrations at the excessive modding going on, it wouldn't take much for someone to join the dots.
Please do pass on my offer. I'm very serious. I'm curious to see if it is as bad as it's made out to be.

Dod101
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2599
Joined: October 10th, 2017, 11:33 am
Has thanked: 452 times
Been thanked: 929 times

Re: HYP Purity (or, when does an HYP become not an HYP?)

#189744

Postby Dod101 » December 28th, 2018, 3:43 pm

I appreciate that it is probably best to ignore this sort of thread but really we want no more prescriptive rules than we already have. I have my occasional gripe at the mods but it is generally the odd one, not the mods as a whole, who do a necessary and pretty thankless task. With respect to the OP, I think this thread ought to have been closed at birth. There is no future in this sort of discussion to my mind.

Dod

Stonge
Lemon Slice
Posts: 386
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:15 pm
Has thanked: 17 times
Been thanked: 37 times

Re: HYP Purity (or, when does an HYP become not an HYP?)

#189762

Postby Stonge » December 28th, 2018, 4:07 pm

I thought moderators were meant to prevent pornography, swearing, harassment, copyright infringement and other 'moderatory' things, not to waste their time adjudicating on nebulous concepts like a true HYP.

What a waste of time. If they cross the 'moderatory' lines, delete their post, otherwise leave them to it. No-one cares.

:arrow:

absolutezero
Lemon Slice
Posts: 404
Joined: November 17th, 2016, 8:17 pm
Has thanked: 13 times
Been thanked: 69 times

Re: HYP Purity (or, when does an HYP become not an HYP?)

#189768

Postby absolutezero » December 28th, 2018, 4:21 pm

Stonge wrote: No-one cares.

:arrow:

Except the **** HYPers.

Moderator Message:
The use of a clinically recognised mental health condition as a pejorative term is not acceptable. You have used this multiple times on various threads and we have erred on the side of charity in not pulling you up earlier. Do not repeat this or similar terms (chas49)

Wizard
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1722
Joined: November 7th, 2016, 8:22 am
Been thanked: 410 times

Re: HYP Purity (or, when does an HYP become not an HYP?)

#189858

Postby Wizard » December 29th, 2018, 12:00 am

dspp wrote:We use our discretion on all matters.

Please do not try to push us into giving hard numbers or hard limits, or else the answer will inevitably reduce discretion.

regards, dspp

But with respect you have to then accept that the volume of moderation decisions will be much higher. As an example, I posted my portfolio on HYP Practical, it is 95.8% HYP compliant with one non-compliant share which is not UK listed. Like Bree I was asked not to post it on HYP Practical again by a moderator. After the discussion of Bree's portfolio I do not know where I stand with regard to posting my portfolio on HYP Practical in future.

Terry.

Breelander
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2431
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:42 pm
Has thanked: 360 times
Been thanked: 684 times

Re: HYP Purity (or, when does an HYP become not an HYP?)

#189866

Postby Breelander » December 29th, 2018, 4:14 am

Wizard wrote:
dspp wrote:We use our discretion on all matters.

Please do not try to push us into giving hard numbers or hard limits, or else the answer will inevitably reduce discretion.

regards, dspp

But with respect you have to then accept that the volume of moderation decisions will be much higher....


It already is much higher than it was on TMF, where the guidance had 'discretion' written into the FAQ.

A HYP strategy doesn't have to adhere 100% to these hallmarks. But if a strategy deviates from them in a major way, such as having a significant proportion invested in funds or frequently selling shares after a shorter holding period, then it is off-topic for this board.
https://web.archive.org/web/20161020175 ... 48855.aspx

I think it is a telling point that the original guidance took six paragraphs to describe the hallmarks of a HYP strategy. The TLF guidance defines an HYP in one. When challenged, some of the more 'Puritan' elements of the mods use this restrictive definition to drive away posters that are not 101% 'pure as the driven snow'. Remember, just because a poster has been driven away from HYP-P doesn't mean they'll automatically post elsewhere. More often than not it just means they've been driven to stop posting.

Over-enthusiatic moderation has been a source of friction for more than a year.

For example, Unilever would never even have been an issue under the TLF moderation, but a year ago here....

if we want to talk about a SHARE , such as unilever , it must be on a SHARES discussion board - NOT STRATEGIES .

discussing a share is NOT a strategy.
Re: New Guidance & 'Rules' for High Yield Discussion Boards


And do you remember Dod's Farewell?
Dod101 wrote:I am not planning to fall off my perch any time soon but I am withdrawing from posting on these Boards.

...and on page 15 of that thread...
Gengulphus wrote:I find it very unhelpful to talk about "the HYP strategy" as though there were only one HYP strategy. It's a favourite ploy with strongly anti-HYP people - it's much easier to plausibly portray a single strategy as "dogmatic", "extreme", etc, than a whole class of strategies. I'm used to that - but it seems to have become part of some moderators' mindsets as well and that worries me.

Stonge
Lemon Slice
Posts: 386
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:15 pm
Has thanked: 17 times
Been thanked: 37 times

Re: HYP Purity (or, when does an HYP become not an HYP?)

#189878

Postby Stonge » December 29th, 2018, 9:00 am

Wizard wrote:As an example, I posted my portfolio on HYP Practical, it is 95.8% HYP compliant with one non-compliant share which is not UK listed. Like Bree I was asked not to post it on HYP Practical again by a moderator. After the discussion of Bree's portfolio I do not know where I stand with regard to posting my portfolio on HYP Practical in future.

Terry.


Such threads should be left to be discussed for appropriateness by members within the board, not removed by an arbitrary draconian decision by a single individual (i.e. a moderator). That is exceeding the remit of moderation.

moorfield
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1399
Joined: November 7th, 2016, 1:56 pm
Has thanked: 278 times
Been thanked: 312 times

Re: HYP Purity (or, when does an HYP become not an HYP?)

#189959

Postby moorfield » December 29th, 2018, 5:15 pm

@Ashfordian

My apologies. I realise your comments which I requoted were not aimed at me. You quoted the very first line of the Board Guidance I had in mind after reading MDW's intervention on Bree's HYPish Portfolio thread. (To my mind "exclusively" and "95% pure" are not the same thing, which is why I posted my question here, and I think too Wizard there.)

For the HYP Practical board we define an HYP as a portfolio comprised exclusively of ordinary shares.


I think HYP Practical is trying to be too many things to too many people, that much is evident perhaps from the Posts count alone compared to others, and frustrating to contribute to when the goalposts seemingly drift in the wind.

Perhaps we need a few "in/out" referendums polls to settle such existential questions, "for a generation", as the politicians say.

Gengulphus
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2658
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:17 am
Been thanked: 1285 times

Re: HYP Purity (or, when does an HYP become not an HYP?)

#190054

Postby Gengulphus » December 30th, 2018, 9:59 am

chas49 wrote:
Moderator Message:
The use of a clinically recognised mental health condition as a pejorative term is not acceptable. You have used this multiple times on various threads and we have erred on the side of charity in not pulling you up earlier. Do not repeat this or similar terms (chas49)

I would suggest that such 'charity' is misplaced. It may spare the feelings of a single board user, but at the expense of the feelings of (potentially many) other board users. So I don't see any net benefit there - quite possibly the reverse.

Holding off on pulling people up for the use of pejorative terms also inevitably fosters the impression (both among those who use the terms and those who read them) that their use is acceptable on the site, and in particular to stooz and Clariman as the site's owners. Assuming that it isn't (*), the most charitable thing the moderators can do IMHO is pull those who use such terms up immediately their use in noticed. Pull them up as nicely as such things can be done - at least a first offence is probably quite inadvertent or simply having a different personal standard about what's acceptable. But don't leave them to build up a habit of using language that is unacceptable on the site!

(*) I'm reasonably certain that it isn't acceptable to stooz and Clariman, given what the site rules and the early threads about them say about the legal risks. But if I'm wrong about its acceptability to them, please be charitable to me and let me know so that I can decide whether I want to use their site!

Gengulphus

Gengulphus
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2658
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:17 am
Been thanked: 1285 times

Re: HYP Purity (or, when does an HYP become not an HYP?)

#190082

Postby Gengulphus » December 30th, 2018, 12:57 pm

Stonge wrote:I thought moderators were meant to prevent pornography, swearing, harassment, copyright infringement and other 'moderatory' things, not to waste their time adjudicating on nebulous concepts like a true HYP.

IMHO off-topicness is a 'moderatory' thing, because moderation of it is essential to prevent the boards being overrun by the hot topic of the day. On discussion boards such as ADVFN's that have very little moderation, for instance, I've seen many threads about specific shares being swamped by Brexit discussions that have little to do with the company concerned: a discussion about how Brexit might affect the company is on-topic, but that all too easily develops into a heated debate about the iniquities of the two sides that (a) tells one little about Brexit's likely effects on the company; (b) is a totally repetitive rehash of huge numbers of similar debates elsewhere.

And IMHO the moderators should adjudicate on the defined topic of the board - not on "nebulous concepts like a true HYP". For instance, "never selling", "strategic ignorance", a company's "culture" and various other things are all associated with being a "true HYP" in various HYPers' minds, and not in others. Moderators should ignore all of those opinions (including their own) and instead deal with moderation issues on the basis of what the board's topic is. That's basically for the same reason that moderators of the "Sports Bar (all sports)" board should adjudicate whether a post is on-topic there on the basis that (for example) posts about the ABC United and XYZ City teams are both about aspects of the sport of football, and not on the basis of their own opinion that ABC United doesn't play football in any "true" sense...

By the way, I'm not saying that I think the HYP Practical board's topic is especially well defined. On the contrary, I think the board's guidance is over-prescriptive about some aspects, too vague about others, and falls between the "rules" and "guidance" stools: rather overlong to be memorable rules, rather too short on guidance about how to apply those rules in the inevitable grey areas. But such as it is, it should be the standard by which the moderators try to adjudicate on-topicness for the board - and within its limitations, as far as I can see it is.

Gengulphus

Stonge
Lemon Slice
Posts: 386
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:15 pm
Has thanked: 17 times
Been thanked: 37 times

Re: HYP Purity (or, when does an HYP become not an HYP?)

#190201

Postby Stonge » December 31st, 2018, 11:31 am

Hmmm...

Another post deleted this morning by heavy handed unnecessary moderation and two valuable contributors considering throwing in the towel.

If a thread drifts too far off topic, as Gengulphus fears, just lock it.

melonfool
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2774
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:18 am
Has thanked: 1131 times
Been thanked: 665 times

Re: HYP Purity (or, when does an HYP become not an HYP?)

#190251

Postby melonfool » December 31st, 2018, 3:08 pm

Stonge wrote:Hmmm...

Another post deleted this morning by heavy handed unnecessary moderation and two valuable contributors considering throwing in the towel.

If a thread drifts too far off topic, as Gengulphus fears, just lock it.


I don't think you need to post here every time a post is deleted. Maybe read what this board is for and then decide whether to make a post?


Mel


Return to “Room 101”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest