I know it has been said that many of my posts are negative, but I would like to explain myself a bit from my perspective.

What really makes a post negative?

I think a post that says 'sell now' or 'we better get out before this crashes', or 'this will never pay off' type of posts would fit into this category. No positive side, just bashing. This is pretty rare occurrence here, but there are examples elsewhere for sure.

I think a lot of the negativity that people refer to in my posts is actually perceived negativity - it depends how you look at it? Let me explain...

For example, I have been talking about the need for financial conservation and the consideration of market conditions/timing before further spending. Depending on how you look at that, it can be negative or positive...

To those wanting to spend and explore it is negative as it is contrary to what they would like to see.

To those that see the value in SC proper, and would like the assurance that their long held investment isn't diluted in the future the post may be perceived as a positive post?

I can't see the bashing in it myself, If anything from my perspective I am trying to protect whats left of my investment, steer away from the dangers I see (not saying I am right about it, but from my perspective it seems fair)? The following discussion and debate helps us sort out what is likely as the other perspectives get their say too.

Questioning something that could have a negative consequence to our investment shouldn't be branded negative.

On the flip side, you could also look at something proposed that may seem positive but harm the value of your holdings as actually a negative post? Just trying to make a point about perspective here, not point fingers.

I think if we can look past the slant we apply because of our own bias or the person posting it (discuss what is said not who said it) - we can widen all our perspectives and see things from the other side too? No harm discussing it either way.