Quote from: RE on Nov 30, 2024, 05:44 PMWell if that is how you allow a simple clothing choice to make the man as it were, then we are both asshole pricks and all the rest of it on your bad people connotation list. Welcome to the club!Quote from: TDoS on Nov 30, 2024, 03:43 PMWill wearing a suit for that presentation make you a "suit"? Because if it doesn't make you a "suit" by your definition, it doesn't make me one either.
Yup, it would make me a suit as soon as I drop on the uniform.
Quote from: REI'll look like somebody's Calculus professor, which should work fairly well to convince the suit that I'm reasonably intelligent.Confusing ones appearance with character, intelligience, honesty etc etc sounds like it falls within the scope of a solid stereotyping plan for sure. Were you taught this perspective by someone, or did you learn it on your own?
Because from one suit to the other, I went in exactly the opposite direction myself.
Quote from: REDon't know. Don't care. Not my dog in their fight. Might know some of the BOA names...I've gone round with some of them before, folks in England, maybe a year or two back. Smart, knowledgeable, knew their way around analysis, seemed informed.Quote from: TdosThe results as provided from my system allow for a low probability above $70. A whiff of chance close to $80/bbl for the year.
Yes, I know and I agree. The question is, who are the "experts" polled by Reuters that are quoted in the OilPrice.com article? Who would make a prediction nearly $10 north of what seems likely?
But I'm not paid to match up against what newspapers print. They "know" as much stupid shit as the internet does with it comes to the intersection of science, analytic thought, analysis and econometric modeling. Throw in appropriate expression of outcomes and the playing field is relatively thin.