I would wager there are several people here who have access to the MLS and other sources of data. For example, I spend almost $800/month on various sources of real estate data for my business.
—————
As for some of the exchanges we’ve been seeing I think it has indeed become quite personal. We’re now rebuking each other over grammar, spelling and punctuation. What is productive about that?
I think it’s ironic that the parties generally don’t seem to hold viewpoints that are entirely opposing. There is much common ground between them and instead of using their macro agreement they are feuding over the micro details. I think some of us have lost sight of the fact that virtually no group of people other than a cult will ever be in 95% agreement on any subject. Elections are won and we are governed by the opinions of a simple majority. Anything above 55% is considered a landslide. We should be very content with attaining 70% concurrence here because that supermajority will dominate the discourse.
These online forums highlight an interesting evolution in our communication. Back when written correspondence was the only way to conduct a non-verbal discussion people were very careful to adopt and maintain a high degree of formality. That formality and “distance” served as a buffer between people and helped them avoid some misunderstandings that can occur as a result of reading between the lines.
That formality has long been dropped from common usage in our society, partly as a result of the technology that has allowed us to conduct live conversations. To be sure, it’s a lot more intimate to be able to use a casual mode of conversation. Now that these online systems allow us to expand our conversations to include more people and to encompass an indefinite time frame we have strangley reverted back to the written modes of communication. Most of us are not good at this because, unlike our grandparents’ generations, we never had to be.
Having come full circle, we are only now seeing the need for a little more formality, reserve and restraint in our conversations and exchanges. The problem is that in the written word it is difficult for most people to accurately convey their tone. The anonymity of the Internet allows us to avoid the decorum we normally maintain when talking with strangers.
It’s like comparing how people drive in the big cities vs. how they drive in a small town. The more anonymity there is the more people assume they won’t have to answer for their uncivil conduct out in public. Conversely, we’re a little more reluctant to tailgate or cut someone off when we know there’s a real good chance we’re going to run into them at the hardware store later today and run into their cousin over at the diner on Saturday.
The bottom line here is that this is a community. How productive our community is going to be will be a function of how well we observe and maintain a minimum standard of conduct. The credibility of the arguments that emanate from this forum will be a function of how level and fair everyone perceives the environment to be. We don’t want our discourses to devolve to the point where Rich has to post rules of conduct or start banning people for acting outside of those rules. Better for us to develop our own internal restraints than to have to rely on external controls. Then when someone crosses the line it is the group, not some moderator, who applies the pressure to conform.
I don’t consider the need for decorum to be some sort of hand holding or I’m-okay-you’re-okay doubletalk. This is all about finding a practical way to attract and analyze the maximum amount of information that pertains to our common interests – which are to observe and forecast (to the extent possible) the direction and depth of the next leg of this economic cycle.
