patrick.net

Should we pass a "Troll Amnesty and Responsibility Act"?

Oh btw, that's exactly what realt-whores are doing. How hard could it be to find some delusional seller with $ signs in his eyes? They go ahead and list the place at a price they KNOW will never move and then use this ninny so they can say "Oh, you think THIS place is expensive!"

Information should be welcome, regardless of whether it fits your paradigm or not.

@randomuser,
Absolutely true, but I woudl say that the information has to be presented accurately. What has irked me about CR/MP/FR is re-posting the same over-bid listing over and over again to give the appearance that many places are going over listing. Bad data is worse than no data at all.

Should we pass a “Troll Amnesty and Responsibility Act”?

How about calling it a "Troll Reprieve and Amnesty Policy" (TRAP)?

How about calling it a “Troll Reprieve and Amnesty Policy” (TRAP)?

Excellent.

the same over-bid listing over and over again to give the appearance that many places are going over listing

I bet you do not like those Center for Consumer Freedom sites then.

Well here's one desperate seller:

http://salem.craigslist.org/rfs/226083986.html

Uh.....dude, this is hardly Portland let alone BA. Instead of throwing in a Mercedes how about a Ford F-150 and rifle rack? Dumbass.

I bet you do not like those Center for Consumer Freedom sites then.

Uh, what makes you think that? ; )

And one of those broad spectrum Seasonal Affective Disorder lights in case a Californian buys it.

Is there a light available for Bubble Affective Disorder (BAD)?? This is the condition where an FB thinks their McAlbatross is worth X amount, they try to sell, and they learn quickly they can't sell for that price and are depressed, but still refuse to lower the price.

Randy,

Actually, I compiled a list of our better blog improvement suggestions from a while back and sent them to Patrick. If you can provide him with some specific suggestions and simple feature comparisons (i.e., Typepad vs. WordPress, etc.) that would be a big help I think. Please also CC me, Peter & SQT, thanks!

skibum,

I'm surprised at you (especially being a physician and all). BAD (Bubble Affective Disorder) is just one of many 'symptoms' of the root disorder AEDS (Acquired Equity Deficiency Syndrome).

And uh.....ain't no sitting in front of a light you bought a Costco gonna help.

I have always been surprised at this blog’s vehement anti-troll stand, considering that when the market was going up, we were the trolls of the RE market.

Trolls who dissent should be welcome, as long as they post something substantial, like good links or arguments.

And herein lies the problem. True-blue "trolls" (not bullish posters) by definition DO NOT HAVE ANYTHING OF VALUE TO ADD TO THE DISCUSSION, DISSENT OR OTHERWISE. Posting real contrarian/bullish dissenting bubble evidence, or debating the validity of a "soft landing" does NOT make one a troll. By that definition, Randy H, Peter P or practically anyone here could have been considered a troll at one time or another.

Trolls don't engage in real give-and-take debate. Trolls just incite flame wars, make childish taunts and personal attacks, and repeat the same "my single data point proves there's no bubble, blah, blah, blah" ad nauseum. Again, this may start off being "cute", then pretty soon gets tiresome, then finally ends up drivign away quality posters.

Information should be welcome, regardless of whether it fits your paradigm or not. Rather than just banning that information, wouldn’t it be better for the blog if someone was motivated enough to rebutt with actual information about how 5 other houses in the Marina didn’t sell?

Information --contrary or not-- is always welcome. If trolls actually provided real information vs. repetitive BS, outright lies and flames, they would not be classified as trolls. Again, honest dissenter does NOT = troll.

Luckily I have a pretty thick skin, but I can easily see how others wouldn’t stick around.

It is good to have a thick skin.

@random user,

Ok, perhaps the problem is in how the term gets tossed around too casually. Simply posting a bullish opinion or contrarian link alone should never get you labelled as such.

By contrast, repeatedly engaging in personal attacks and/or deliberately inciting flame wars should definitely qualify. Repeatedly posting the same tired egocentric B.S. and unsupported REIC propaganda over and over and over, and ignoring whatever anyone else says is borderline trollish to me, but I'm willing to keep an open mind.

For the record, Face Reality (to my knowledge anyway) was never actually banned from this site (unlike MP). He just chose to stop posting after I directly challenged him on one of his more bald-faced lies. In other words, he banished himself.

In addition to properly inspecting.....detecting.....and rejecting trolls we should all make an effort to retain good posters as well! There was this guy that did a fantastic video link "diary" of the Missoula, MT market. Anyone remember that guy? I could have watched his patient and frank analysis all day! Anybody save the link? We should invite him back!

I agree to tolerate almost any troll provided s/he is entertaining and at least tries to be creative. However, boring abusive trolls should be killed on sight. CR doesn't violate that standard, so I don't care if he stays.

Can I give consent to personal attacks directed towards me?

Maybe I'm too much of a "glass half-empty" pessimist, but something doesn't strike me quite right about this rosy assessment from IndyMac Bank's CEO:

http://www.inman.com/inmannews.aspx?ID=58557

"Despite worries about adjustable-mortgage resets next year that will hit more than 10 percent of all households with outstanding home debt and a fear of government pressure to limit so-called "exotic products," lenders still like the "LTV," or loan-to-value, odds, which have 51 percent of all equity in American households untapped.

While he admits that "the (reverse mortgage) products, in the early days, weren't great," he insists "the current FHA product is fabulous."

Ok, now, let me get this straight: We're down to a nationwide average of 51% homeowner equity, which is just an average, meaning most have less, some have more. This is actually the LOWEST percentage for as long as they've been keeping records (down from 68.3% in 1973: http://www.demos.org/page269.cfm). But this is actually a GOOD thing because it shows that over half of existing home equity (at today's prices) is available to raid... er, "liberate"... with HELOCs, cash-out refis and "fabulous" new reverse mortgages.

Maybe it's because I don't have my New Paradigm rose-colored bifocals yet, but I'm really having a tough time seeing Mr. Perry's POV. Does this mean that the new IDEAL equity target is 0%? I thought having your mortgage paid in full was supposed to be a retirement goal. Am I out-of-touch with the New Ekonomy?

Could some nice non-trollish RE perma-bull out there please educate me? CR? Thanks.

(-) most have less, some have more
(+) some have less, some have more (or... most have less or more)

Does this mean that the new IDEAL equity target is 0%?

No. It should be -25%. Voodoo loan is the future!

There was this guy that did a fantastic video link “diary” of the Missoula, MT market. Anyone remember that guy?

@DinOR,

I believe the guy is TangoinUniform? I also recall that the analysis was for Billings, not Missoula.

However, boring abusive trolls should be killed on sight. CR doesn’t violate that standard, so I don’t care if he stays.

CR is not abusive, but he's boring as hell, except that the pile-on we do on him is entertaining.

skibum,

I stand corrected! Billings? Missoula? They're both in MT right?! (Kidding).

Yeah, quality guy. It takes a great amount of patience to develop your position going all the way back to the early-mid 90's. When he was done making his case the only thing perma bulls/trolls can say is, uh.........

Affordability? A problem? Well uh we're selling these to CA equity locusts? Rally? Well let's look at what it's gonna take for that to pan out?

This should be part of the TARP program. Read Patrick's "preamble" and watch this video BEFORE you can even post! Nah, they just want some quick and easy JBR blood.

Thanks for the lurker invite to comment, Randy H. I do read this blog daily, but rarely post (I seldom feel the need, as the regulars here know so much more and express things so much better than I could). But it is nice to feel included!

My take is that the problem is not so much the trolls per se (they are just doing what trolls do), but the fact that there often are other posters who become so upset by a particular troll that discussion degenerates into a flame war, which then is upsetting to almost everyone. I guess part of the question is whether we (as a bearish blog community) are feeling sufficiently confident about the direction of the housing market to ensure that trolling is less disruptive.

Personally, I miss Marina Prime, and I am certainly in favor of anything that increases the participation of Surfer-X. Perhaps we could do a trial period of unrestricted commentary and re-evaluate that decision if necessary?

Oh, almost forget to mention: Mr. Perry's nationwide average "51% equity" figure is based on TODAY's prices. If prices retreat to say, 2001 levels or lower, that figure will be substantially lower. In fact, it could fall to zero or even go negative. Just like our national savings rate.

I don't think we need to ban CR. He's more harmless than me (in regards to threads hijacked). Maybe the way to handle him is to erase individual misleading comments.

Banning trolls make more sense for dealing with jukubot clones. If a poster bothers to write up a post, I think it's worthwhile for an administrator or threadmaster to look at the post and decide whether or not it was abusive.

I've always felt the *abuse* alone is too vague and judgmental as reason for banning. A lot of stuff posted by regulars might constitute abuse under certain definitions - I really prefer administrators not to make subjective judgments about what constitutes *good* content.

I thought having your mortgage paid in full was supposed to be a retirement goal.
Hmmm... I wonder how boomers are doing on this account. I actually agree with his assement of the market regarding reverse mortgages. I sure don't have a pension like my parents and will probably need a reverse mortgage at some point in my retirement. That said, the numbers regarding equity were somewhat disturbing. What, you mean my plasma TV set returns only a penny on a dollar?
Robert Bruss usually talks about reverse mortgages at least once a month:

Q: I have around $300,000 "idle equity" in my home....
My children advise against it. Your opinion please.

Mavis R.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/10/29/REGM6LVAG71.DTL

A: Go for it! Enjoy your equity. Your selfish children know you will be spending their inheritance so they want to discourage you from fully enjoying your retirement while you are still in good health.

An interest-only loan with no negative amortization sounds ideal as long as you can afford the monthly payments on your retirement income, both now and in 10 years when the payment adjusts.

The type of mortgage that gets homeowners in financial trouble is the "option mortgage" where the monthly payments are so low they don't even pay the interest.

When that happens, the lender adds the unpaid interest to the mortgage balance, resulting in negative amortization where the borrower owes more than the original balance.

Definition of a Troll (more than you ever wanted to know).

I am not for banning Confused Renter, as long as he can give any factual information that I am not aware of, be it a certain house selling above asking, or a different website where I can track information better.

The other day he suggested a website called trulia that I was not aware of, and I have been using the data published on that site for tracking certain neighborhoods.

Since we are all bears, I actually like to have more bulls on this site so that I don't miss out on the bull's argument, especially if they are clever bulls. I am in an extreme anti-dollar position in my own investment portfolio, but I read dollar bull arguments all the time to make sure that I don't overlook any sound facts that may make me pay dearly in the market later.

However, I am for banning GC because he has nothing to offer, either bullish or bearish, except some pedophilic obsession that pops its head from time to time which has absolutely no value-add to what we are collectively interested in: where the housing market is heading, where the US economy is heading.

He can find better XXX sites to express his sexual frustration.

He can find better XXX sites to express his sexual frustration.

How about Mark Foley's homepage? [_ducks_]

However, I am for banning GC because he has nothing to offer, either bullish or bearish, except some pedophilic obsession that pops its head from time to time which has absolutely no value-add to what we are collectively interested in: where the housing market is heading, where the US economy is heading.

I do not think GC is a pedophile.

I agree that GC has joked about things that are insensitive. But I might have done the same as well.

"Just like our National savings rate" LOL!

As President of the Mortgage Brokers Association I give you my solemn promise that I won't rest until every last dime in home owner's equity is HELOC'd up to our collective eyeballs!

Great.

CG,

As the close relative of two Shanghai ke da physics graduates and relative of people who went just about everywhere in Shanghai except your alma mater, I must say I always thought Fudan's physics department was only so-so.

I have prejudices. I am arrogant sometimes. I am proud sometimes. And I boast quite often. So?

I think that should be fine.

When I posted a trade, it was real. I don’t urge people to take risks that I myself haven’t taken.

Do not forget a disclaimer though. :)

I voice some of my opinions which may make some people feel bad. So? You can do the same.

Go to greencrabs.blogspot.com as well. We are trying to make it a controversial food blog.

Please no flame wars in the thread on treatment of trolls. That's too narcissitically ironic for even me.

No flame war. Let's talk about flambée on astrid's blog.

Randy,

Sorry...

I love flambée.