- This topic has 81 replies, 38 voices, and was last updated 17 years, 6 months ago by PerryChase.
-
AuthorPosts
-
May 3, 2007 at 1:30 PM #8995May 3, 2007 at 1:39 PM #51746CritterParticipant
Wow – that’s quite a nastygram. She’s always been full of vitriol, but now she has gone TOO FAR.
May 3, 2007 at 1:41 PM #51747woodrowParticipantFor good housing market analyses, go to my website.
Hey Professor Berkland – do you know what "spell check" is?
Why would ANYONE pay for analysis from someone who can't even spell analysis?
Poweyseller = amateur hour.
May 3, 2007 at 1:43 PM #51748crParticipantCheap plug, but I’m not about to take advice on buying from a Realtor. She used to be a regular contributor here, why the fallout?
May 3, 2007 at 1:45 PM #51750surveyorParticipantglass houses…
“Analyses” is the plural of analysis.
May 3, 2007 at 1:50 PM #51751CritterParticipantCooprider, she used to post a lot and get quite strident when people disagreed with her. She started off with decent ideas but disintegrated over time – got quite upset when anyone had a different point of view, ESPECIALLY when they were right.
The classic “jump the shark” post is “S&P dropping to 600 by spring 07.” People keep bringing it back from the dead.
May 3, 2007 at 1:55 PM #51753no_such_realityParticipantGot to disagree. Her “Jump the Shark” post was Did This Really Happen
The lack of logical analysis is painfully obvious.
May 3, 2007 at 1:56 PM #51754masayakoParticipantPowayseller,
You say Rich’s analysis is Lacking, I just want to know: Where are the proofs?
Do you have any data to back what you say?
In God I trust, everyone else (including you) please bring data.
Masayako
May 3, 2007 at 2:01 PM #51755woodrowParticipantglass houses… "Analyses" is the plural of analysis.
Well aware of that – her sentence indicates analysis was the term she was looking for, not analyses.
May 3, 2007 at 2:01 PM #51756bubParticipantThanks for the heads up brooke. I just left a comment.
Damn she is “totally whacked”(as the kids like to say).
Gonna say a little prayer for her husband and children. She can go to hell.
May 3, 2007 at 2:03 PM #51757blahblahblahParticipantSomeone needs to check the IP logs at VOSD and compare them to the Piggington IP log — I doubt that’s really her. It looks to me like a blatant attempt by a PS-hater to discredit her. She was never rude to Rich as far as I can remember and she’s not going to bash anyone for being too data-oriented since that’s what her whole website is about. Whoever posted it exhibits the characteristic poor spelling of an insecure faux-intellectual; one doesn’t “pour over data”, one “pores over data”.
May 3, 2007 at 2:05 PM #51758woodrowParticipantsounds just like powayseller to me.
May 3, 2007 at 2:07 PM #51759PDParticipantWow, I think she has an honest to goodness mental disorder. She would completely go off the deep end now and again when she was posting here. Maybe she is bipolar. In any event, Rich chastised her previously (with good reason) and she seems to be intent on getting revenge by attacking him (while also drumming up traffic on her website). In addition to being disgusting, it is very sad, for she clearly has a lot of natural intelligence, which seems to have been hijacked by psychosis.
May 3, 2007 at 2:46 PM #51764AnonymousGuestI’m not convinced PS wrote that, it sounds so foolish as if it had to be a joke. We all know PS is a little whacky/moody sometimes but I always chalked that up to menopause.
May 3, 2007 at 2:58 PM #51765sdrealtorParticipantBefore anyone tries to throw me under the bus, it was unequivocably not my work. I’m surprised someone hasnt tried to attribute it to me as an attempt to discredit her. I have nothing but the utmost respect for Rich and would never do anything like that. I doubt that it was submitted by her as that seems well below her.
BTW, I am responsible for global warming.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.