Congratulations explorer and thanks phishead for the work you put in. This was a cool game.
Can anybody tell me if Shelby is insane, like schizophrenic maybe? I spent a lot of time reading his posts a while ago and came out of it feeling like I'd been duped into wasting my time. He writes so much and says so little, it's really frustrating. Also do you have any concrete recommendations you've taken out of Armstrong's research? Are any of his paid products worthwhile?
Can anybody tell me if Shelby is insane, like schizophrenic maybe? I spent a lot of time reading his posts a while ago and came out of it feeling like I'd been duped into wasting my time. He writes so much and says so little, it's really frustrating. Also do you have any concrete recommendations you've taken out of Armstrong's research? Are any of his paid products worthwhile?
Shelby is a little full of himself, as many intelligent people are, and does a lot of tail chasing. Sanity is harder to nail down. Stupid unimaginative people may appear sane, but maybe they are just stupid and unimaginative, hmm? Crazy people may just be on another wavelength, not necessarily having a short circuit. I'm certainly not going to point any fingers in the sanity field. Not until I get out of this I Love Me jacket, anyway
One of my favorite quotes ever
:The thing about smart mother fuckers is that sometimes, they sound like crazy mother fuckers to stupid mother fuckers...
-Robert Kirkman
I haven't paid for any Armstrong products, but his major calls on world/economic/social/political events are astounding, years or decades ahead, and he sells out his conferences to a very high powered crowd. I don't trade anything in the legacy system,( just watch what's locked in bleed) so trading calls don't interest me, just the trends and reversals for their prescience. His understanding of crypto seems cursory, at best despite being a coder and an economist/trader, but there's not much history for him to work from, and he's old. Worth a dive down the rabbit hole, just to see the depth and breadth of his data sets. Don't worry, despite the horrible lack of proof reading, he's much easier to read than SM3.