Every now and again on sites such as S'pedia, the subject of following the ideas of other posters surfaces. Often, the discussion turns to so-called 'respected posters' and whether they might have more of a duty of care than others.
Whilst I have clear views which I'll expand on below, I'll leave this thread-opener neutral.
SW10
Disclaimer:
As per our Terms of Use, Stockopedia is a financial news & data site, discussion forum and content aggregator. Our site should be used for educational & informational purposes only. We do not provide investment advice, recommendations or views as to whether an investment or strategy is suited to the investment needs of a specific individual. You should make your own decisions and seek independent professional advice before doing so. The author may own shares in any companies discussed, all opinions are his/her own & are general/impersonal. Remember: Shares can go down as well as up. Past performance is not a guide to future performance & investors may not get back the amount invested.


2 Posts on this Thread show/hide all
There has been some discussion on this subject on this Aminex thread.
Ingledew makes the case that:
I disagree with this, save to say that everyone should observe the rules that S'pedia have set out here in their guidelines. This includes legal requirements...
... as well as behavioral elements such as:
However, the most important element is this:
In other words, no-one is making any recommendations or urging others to follow a particular course of action. Further, it's evident that no-one can ever claim to know what is going to happen and it's common sense for anyone that they should do their own research and satisfy themselves that a particular course of action is:
This is sometimes referred to as Do Your Own Research or DYOR, which should be a by-word for any Private Investor.
On the subject of 'well-respected' posters, I think this is also a fallacy. Putting your trust in someone's words on a stock is rather like believing someone who tells you who will win next year's Premiership. If someone you know, indeed who you respect and whose judgement you value says that Liverpool are a dead cert to win the Premiership can you honestly believe them? And if you gambled on that outcome, who would be responsible if it turned out not to be the case?
There can only be one answer in my view. It's you.
Now, imagine if you were intrigued by the idea. Wouldn't it be better to ask a few questions? What makes your friend so certain? Have they got any insights you haven't? Do you believe them? Why not test with your friend your theory that Chelsea are a much better bet? Engage in debate (robust and on-topic!) and get hold of more information that will help you to make a decision. Your decision.
There are many cases of 'respected' posters agreeing on one thing and not another. That's good, those differences are often where the light comes in. Be part of it.
SW10
Machiavelli put things very well......
Internet bulletin boards are dripping with ideas put forward by other people. Some are inspired, some are delusional. Some are mistaken, some are the result of wishful thinking.
I have harvested many ideas over the years. It is always always always down to me to consider them, do my own research and decide whether to act or not. If I miss opportunities or make bad decisions or make good decisions which turn out wrong - all of that is my own fault. I can't ever blame anyone else.
If I seize opportunites, make good decisions and prosper, then I give myself credit but I also acknowledge the helping hand. And If possible I try to reciprocate.