Poker,
"... I often see their work showing up in his post with never a tip of the hat."
Yeah, well, I noticed he posted a 3/8/20 chart quite a few days ago, and not a peep about what provoked him to do that. I exposed the 3/8/20 method to him about 2- or 3-years ago without any peeps then either.
The thing is, I don't really care. The thing I care about is that when I present ideas or other ways of doing something, the recipients more often than not don't look upon them as ideas worth exploring; instead, they look at those suggestions as criticism of the ways they are already doing things. Well, maybe I present my ideas in too abrupt of a manner. I'm more inclined to think that I'm encountering fragile egos.
There are very effective ways for people to work together and solve difficult problems and come up with results that are better than the sum of individual contributions. One way starts out with brainstorming. During that phase everyone is allowed to present ideas and no one is allowed to criticize. If I lead that group, anyone having the illusion of that phase lasting forever is going to be asked to leave the group. Eventually that phase ends and the process of idea elimination starts. In my opinion, that process can't possibly make good progress without having an evaluation scale that spans the distance from good to bad. Anyone with fragile egos just might have to leave the room during that phase -- forever, I hope. There certainly isn't going to be a scale that goes from good to not-so-good just so some fragile egos can survive a little rejection.
I'm done with this. It's a waste of time.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
