We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Clearly there is no moderation here
Comments
-
-
Or maybe, given the link in the profile, someone waiting to promote Vietnamese Eco City projects?0
-
Kernel_Sanders wrote: »I very much suspect that account was set up by someone at MSE, to avoid the torrent of complaints that I expect they'd receive if posting in their MSE staff capacity.
Also, JFK assassination and 9/11 were both inside jobs and clearly the moon landings were staged in an old warehouse.
Or maybe you don't have to assume everything to be a conspiracy.0 -
bowlhead99 wrote: »Also, JFK assassination and 9/11 were both inside jobs and clearly the moon landings were staged in an old warehouse.
Or maybe you don't have to assume everything to be a conspiracy.
Poster is not assuming everything is a conspiracy - just that this is.0 -
He'd had temporary bans before, from what I recall for getting into spats with people who are being abusive so he could easily get trolled or drawn in.
His advice was generally very good and he provided a useful perspective for many in not only being objective but also showing how an advisor would view things.
On the other hand he had a particular perspective based in his day job and that could affect his opinions, sometimes for the better and sometimes for the worse.
It was always the fault of the victim for not being clever enough to spot when they went into a bad deal, it was never the IFA at fault.
As I said I'm a long term lurker and the board now seems a lot more cheerful now he's gone, he did seem to think it was his board.0 -
capital0ne wrote: »From what I recall of this person (D*****h) he appeared to know quite a bit but he dod lord it over anyone he replied to with his 'superior' knowledge and his general attitide, so I'm not surprised he's been banned. I seem to recall he had a number of spats with anone who criticised his comments, especially drawing attention to any bad press against IFA's.
It was always the fault of the victim for not being clever enough to spot when they went into a bad deal, it was never the IFA at fault.
As I said I'm a long term lurker and the board now seems a lot more cheerful now he's gone, he did seem to think it was his board.
I can't even imagine that you're talking about the same person as the one whose posts I have read and admired over the years.
He truly knew his stuff and it is not his fault that sometimes, if you write as an expert, people who don't know as much as you and who might have got things wrong will feel aggrieved and put out by you simply being right when they are not. Especially when writing on technical subjects rather than fluffy head-patting topics. It isn't being "superior" in attitude to give a correct, comprehensive and factual answer.
I am a tax adviser and my formal style for written advice is very different to my style when writing to friends.0 -
capital0ne wrote: »From what I recall of this person (D*****h) he appeared to know quite a bit but he dod lord it over anyone he replied to with his 'superior' knowledge and his general attitide, so I'm not surprised he's been banned. I seem to recall he had a number of spats with anone who criticised his comments, especially drawing attention to any bad press against IFA's.
It was always the fault of the victim for not being clever enough to spot when they went into a bad deal, it was never the IFA at fault.
As I said I'm a long term lurker and the board now seems a lot more cheerful now he's gone, he did seem to think it was his board.0 -
capital0ne wrote: »From what I recall of this person (D*****h) he appeared to know quite a bit but he dod lord it over anyone he replied to with his 'superior' knowledge and his general attitide, so I'm not surprised he's been banned. I seem to recall he had a number of spats with anone who criticised his comments, especially drawing attention to any bad press against IFA's.
It was always the fault of the victim for not being clever enough to spot when they went into a bad deal, it was never the IFA at fault.
As I said I'm a long term lurker and the board now seems a lot more cheerful now he's gone, he did seem to think it was his board.
Certain people are anti-IFA and post in a way that needs challenging as what they are saying does not make sense. Such as when there is an anti IFA rant and it turns out it was SJP being used or it is a failure of understanding rather than a failure of advice. Sometimes it is a bad IFA.
Certain people like to wind up others to provoke a reaction. Was that your intention when you posted in a previous thread:
Why don't sharks attack IFAs? Professional courtesy.
IFAs are people that help you with problems you would not have had without them.
Maybe that explains your negativity.0 -
gingercordial wrote: »people who don't know as much as you and who might have got things wrong will feel aggrieved and put out by you simply being right when they are not. Especially when writing on technical subjects rather than fluffy head-patting topics. It isn't being "superior" in attitude to give a correct, comprehensive and factual answer.
I've seen this a lot on this forum (Loans board seems to have a large amount of it), I think it's an Ego issue. People don't like being told that they are wrong, and will sometimes fight to their last breath just because of their Ego.Goals
Save £12k in 2017 #016 (£4212.06 / £10k) (42.12%)
Save £12k in 2016 #041 (£4558.28 / £6k) (75.97%)
Save £12k in 2014 #192 (£4115.62 / £5k) (82.3%)0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 351.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.7K Spending & Discounts
- 244.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.4K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.1K Life & Family
- 257.7K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards