Kado101
Sophomore Author
Oklahoma
Posts:230
Points:388,735
Joined:Oct 2008
|
Message Posted: Mar 26, 2012 3:38:56 PM
Lets hope it affects the election
|
TheMomma
All-Star Author
North Carolina
Posts:545
Points:200,395
Joined:Jan 2005
|
Message Posted: Mar 26, 2012 9:17:37 AM
the way obama has run our debt up has dropped the dollar and that has caused some of the price increase. When a dollar is worth 50ct then the price of gas is going to go up artificially until that dollar gains value.
|
kxy4fw
Champion Author
Denver
Posts:1,226
Points:275,355
Joined:Nov 2011
|
Message Posted: Mar 26, 2012 8:15:16 AM
It could.
|
gasmask78
Champion Author
Virginia
Posts:2,283
Points:446,565
Joined:Sep 2011
|
Message Posted: Mar 26, 2012 7:20:14 AM
Finally I see an intelligent post..thanks SUVFan..I have been trying to get that message out since I hopped on here, but have never been able to do so as eloquently as you just did.
|
plastic
Champion Author
Virginia
Posts:46,842
Points:2,841,070
Joined:May 2004
|
Message Posted: Mar 23, 2012 8:57:09 AM
Don't worry. Prices will drop in November. They always do.
|
scoutmaster
Champion Author
Pittsburgh
Posts:81,372
Points:3,255,570
Joined:Mar 2003
|
Message Posted: Mar 7, 2012 12:10:29 PM
When an oil baron farts, the speculators ramp up the wholesale price which in turn ramps up the retail price. When a hurricane is forecast for Burma, the speculators ramp up the wholesale price which in turn ramps up the retail price. It has nothing to do with supply and demand. It has everything to do with greed.
|
SUVFan
Champion Author
Columbus
Posts:13,928
Points:1,635,525
Joined:Oct 2008
|
Message Posted: Mar 7, 2012 9:22:21 AM
>Gas prices are controlled by the speculators on Wall Street, not supply and demand. <
Say what? Though I don't understand why this thread is still here, I can't let that statement pass.
Speculators simply affect short term supply and demand by purchasing oil futures. Their behavior can affect short term prices in either direction depending upon where they anticipate the market price will be at some future date but they have no control on the ultimate price -- they are simply betting on what the price will be down the road. Some bets are better informed than others. And some have more luck at it than others.
When a hurricane if forecast for the gulf, it's likely that supply will be decreased in the short term. The unknown question is for how long and to what extent? Enter the speculator who guesses at that answer and decides to buy options on futures contracts depending on how that guess about the future price relates to the current one. When they buy up those contracts at higher prices, prices rise in part due to that increased demand relative to the likely declining supply. When those oil prices rise, refineries and gasoline retailers will often increase their price on their products immediately. But this is a chain reaction to the underlying event.
The speculators' profits or losses will typically be wholly dependent on how good their guesses turn out to be, in this example dependent upon the path and intensity of the hurricane. If the hurricane misses or fizzles, they dump those contracts if they can or their options simply end up being worthless if their option price is higher than the market price at the time it matures.
The exact same process happens with gold, silver, wheat, corn, soybeans and other commodities.
|
scoutmaster
Champion Author
Pittsburgh
Posts:81,372
Points:3,255,570
Joined:Mar 2003
|
Message Posted: Mar 7, 2012 5:45:21 AM
Gas prices are controlled by the speculators on Wall Street, not supply and demand.
|
HEDGEHOGS
All-Star Author
Illinois
Posts:630
Points:17,040
Joined:Mar 2007
|
Message Posted: Mar 6, 2012 6:31:40 PM
puddinpal. thanks for opening up everyones eyes to what is going on here. the media is in love with this guy while our country is going to hell. where's it going to end? november hopefully. enough is enough.
|
PuddinPal
Champion Author
California
Posts:3,436
Points:673,315
Joined:Dec 2008
|
Message Posted: Mar 6, 2012 10:29:19 AM
I think the American people are brain dead when it comes to Obama. The press gives him a free ride on everything. Whatever he can't fix becomes someone else's fault and the press lets him get away with it. History is going to have some real interesting insights on the role of the main stream press and their cheer leading for the Obama administration.
|
dakid007
Rookie Author
Detroit
Posts:1
Points:54,100
Joined:May 2011
|
Message Posted: Mar 1, 2012 10:37:24 PM
Gas hikes are truly a scam imposed on us by our dear elected officials on both sides!!!
|
bulldog011
Rookie Author
Mississippi
Posts:20
Points:1,360
Joined:Feb 2012
|
Message Posted: Mar 1, 2012 2:58:54 PM
Alot of people say that the president has nothing to do with the rising gas prices. But in my opinion he's apart of the gov't and like they say "the gov't controlls everything". I believe that if the next president drilled an oil well in the us it would save a ton of money.
|
RichWLIN
Champion Author
Indiana
Posts:4,107
Points:640,815
Joined:Jun 2011
|
Message Posted: Mar 1, 2012 9:56:57 AM
maxstar, a search for “new members starting topics” yielded a hit from, I believe, the Akron GB site, and I was then able to locate this topic started by the scoutmaster, a compulsory ignored member. Incidentally, I did not participate in this discussion as has been suggested by the author here.
I read through most of it without finding anything that would dissuade me from my opinion about requiring 100 forum posts before being able to start a topic; although, there was some reasonable conversation and debate in that thread for a short while.
This all seems like a moot point inasmuch as there has been no interest by GB management in making any changes to the forum protocol. Essentially, it really doesn’t matter what we think or how persuasive anyone’s case on any subject may be. These forums are apparently just fodder for generating advertising revenue with little or no regard to the quality of the content. We may as well just agree to disagree.
RG
|
HomelyGrits
Sophomore Author
Dayton
Posts:224
Points:44,055
Joined:Dec 2011
|
Message Posted: Mar 1, 2012 6:24:47 AM
Certainly isn't gonna help the sorry SOB. He won't take any blame & besides, he wants gas prices to go up.
|
scoutmaster
Champion Author
Pittsburgh
Posts:81,372
Points:3,255,570
Joined:Mar 2003
|
Message Posted: Mar 1, 2012 6:08:38 AM
Yup I started that topic. It turned into a me vs Scraps & Rich. Neither liked my idea. % and numbers were tossed about but had no basis.
I have since backed off the 60 consecutive days but still think 35,000 points is a good threshold.
|
RichWLIN
Champion Author
Indiana
Posts:4,107
Points:640,815
Joined:Jun 2011
|
Message Posted: Mar 1, 2012 5:05:42 AM
Tried to follow your link maxstar but got:
"We're sorry! This topic is no longer available."
|
maxstar
Champion Author
Chicago
Posts:18,496
Points:811,495
Joined:Feb 2011
|
Message Posted: Feb 29, 2012 10:37:09 PM
RichWLIN: I agree that the topic should be moved or locked. If you get a chance though read through the responses in the locked topic below. It include my responses to the issues you point out. I think there is value to some reasonable thresholds.
New Members Starting Topics
[Edited by: maxstar at 2/29/2012 11:37:56 PM EST]
|
Scrapheap
Champion Author
Virginia
Posts:14,556
Points:2,360,780
Joined:Sep 2006
|
Message Posted: Feb 29, 2012 8:54:08 PM
Yeah, riight, surrre, they are going to get banned. Is it the outstanding moderation of these forums that makes you believe that?
|
bytebug
Champion Author
Orange County
Posts:26,399
Points:4,125,580
Joined:Oct 2001
|
Message Posted: Feb 29, 2012 6:07:47 PM
>> That creates an incentive to post fluff to non-fluff threads...
Which gets them banned, which prevents any more posts.
|
PuddinPal
Champion Author
California
Posts:3,436
Points:673,315
Joined:Dec 2008
|
Message Posted: Feb 29, 2012 10:25:24 AM
RichWLIN makes a lot of sense, as usual. He is one of the few in here that has his head on strait. Thank you, RichWLIN.
|
RichWLIN
Champion Author
Indiana
Posts:4,107
Points:640,815
Joined:Jun 2011
|
Message Posted: Feb 29, 2012 8:10:53 AM
Maxstar, Thanks for your comments in response to mine. A few things come to mind after reading what you have to say.
Firstly, requiring people to meet some forum posting criteria before having the ability to post seems inappropriate. I’ll explain one of the reasons why. If I scroll through the Indiana points leader list, for example, I find that there are very few members that post here much and apparently more that don’t post at all. Some of these folks have been members for much longer than you or I, but for whatever reason have not found posting in the forums useful.
Hypothetically, let’s say that a member joined in September of 2009, has 360K points but has only posted in the forums 16 times. If an issue arises and or this member has a question (asked and answered or otherwise), your system would prohibit him from asking his question and require him to search through the myriad of disorganized and disjointed forum topics and posts using the inadequate search features available to him here. He will probably not have much knowledge of how things work here, and it is unlikely that he’ll find his answer quickly and efficiently.
It should be obvious that you can’t force members in good standing to make some requisite number of forum posts without alienating some who are otherwise contributing to the basic premise of the site.
Secondly, the problem is really one that is inherent to all communities. There will always be leaders and followers; those who know what’s going on and those who don’t including a majority of people in various stages in between. If a member of the community asks a redundant question, I would suggest that the best solution is simply to politely set them straight and point them in the right direction without malice. Instead, some members feel it necessary to make snide and sarcastic remarks.
The “one post wonder” problem is a function of the site moderation, or rather the lack thereof. I suspect that more of these than not are really just new people asking what appear to be dumb questions. Rather than responding with gang rebuke, and then taking bets on whether they will ever return or not (as is too often the case here) there should be moderation and clarity in the tone of response. If someone has already responded to the member and pointed them to the FAQ, etc. what purpose does it serve to pile on in an effort to humiliate the offender?
While we’re on the topic of moderation, I think we’ll all agree that there really isn’t much to speak of here. Apparently, there is no desire to rock the boat and curb the total number of posts since the volume of traffic (good and bad) tends to increase advertising revenue. Paying a moderator to oversee all of this would be an expense that takes two bites out of the profit margin. At least, that’s my opinion of why this site isn’t really structured or purposely intended for sustained substantive discussion.
Finally, we’re pretty far off topic here. I would agree that this thread should have been moved or locked before the conversation strayed this far.
RG
[Edited by: RichWLIN at 2/29/2012 9:16:23 AM EST]
|
scoutmaster
Champion Author
Pittsburgh
Posts:81,372
Points:3,255,570
Joined:Mar 2003
|
Message Posted: Feb 29, 2012 5:56:10 AM
I think the point threshold should be 35,000 to start a new topic with the exception of the JFF category. Anyone can start a topic there. It's just a bunch of junk anyway.
I don't think anyone has proposed new members not be allowed to post in the forums until they reach a certain threshold. And I disagree, kwzh. If new members can start topics in the JFF category, that should suffice. I don't think it would create the incentive you speak of.
I kinda agree with you bytebug. Those 35,000 could be the result of price posting but using forum posts as well could possibly increase the new members knowledge of the site. Maybe the 35,000 points could be only for price posting and forum posts. That would be 850/day which means it would take a new member roughly 42 days to hit the threshold. That should be enough time to get familiar with the site.
We should probably move this to a new topic, huh?
|
kwzh
Champion Author
San Jose
Posts:20,659
Points:3,684,560
Joined:Jul 2001
|
Message Posted: Feb 29, 2012 5:23:02 AM
maxstar writes,
> 100 posts to existing threads, before gaining the ability to create a new thread. The post count should exclude the fluff areas like Just for Fun or Off Topic
That creates an incentive to post fluff to non-fluff threads. I disapprove.
|
bytebug
Champion Author
Orange County
Posts:26,399
Points:4,125,580
Joined:Oct 2001
|
Message Posted: Feb 29, 2012 4:54:48 AM
>> 10000 points (reflects overall involvement with site via fuel updates, news articles and forums)
I'd like to see a sizable portion of those points actually be fuel price updates, to reflect an actual contribution to the site.
I'd also consider a somewhat lower threshold before being able to create threads in their local forum.
While these restrictions would made a small dent in forum noise, the complete lack of moderation needs to be addressed at some point. The fact that this thread has not been locked, and still exists in TBTU clearly demonstrates that.
|
maxstar
Champion Author
Chicago
Posts:18,496
Points:811,495
Joined:Feb 2011
|
Message Posted: Feb 28, 2012 10:14:22 PM
RichWLIN: Reasonable restrictions on new members creating new threads would improve the experience on these forums. There is no way to eliminate nonsense but some restrictions would help to reduce duplicate threads, one hit wonders, spam and trolls. Members would be free to participate in the many existing thread allowing them a better way to get a better feel for the dynamics. After gaining the ability to create a post most will have a better sense of what is coming their way .
I have been a proponent of requiring a combination of three relatively low thresholds that could be met fairly quickly. They are 10 days, 100 posts and 10,000 points. The thresholds I would suggested are:
- GB age 10 days
- 100 posts to existing threads, before gaining the ability to create a new thread. The post count should exclude the fluff areas like Just for Fun or Off Topic. (reflects experience within the forums).
- 10000 points (reflects overall involvement with site via fuel updates, news articles and forums)
No need for consecutive days. Not everyone visits the site every day.
It would reduce "one hit wonders" that join for the sole purpose to use the site as a megaphone for some crusade. And it might help reduce the frequency of trolls. The variety of existing threads is pretty broad so new members would have plenty of topics to jump into. And who knows they might just lend a new perspective to older threads.
[Edited by: maxstar at 2/28/2012 11:15:18 PM EST]
|
RichWLIN
Champion Author
Indiana
Posts:4,107
Points:640,815
Joined:Jun 2011
|
Message Posted: Feb 28, 2012 7:11:36 AM
This definitely looks like a member just trying to start a controversial topic thread, and it seems that it may have been placed here to generate derisive comments.
But, these sorts of threads typically turn to a discussion about prohibiting all new members from posting and or some form of admonishment for not having been around long enough to “learn” the site, or a debate over who has enough points to express an opinion or ask a question. The most recent example of this discussion can be found
here.
There is little or no moderation here, so it seems that people will continue to advance whatever cause they want whenever an opportunity arises. Some of the same members make all the same complaints found here, and some outwardly appear to search for these kinds of topics to respond to for just this purpose. This is just another kind of noise, that after the umpteenth assertion, is not much more useful than is this misplaced OP.
|
Scrapheap
Champion Author
Virginia
Posts:14,556
Points:2,360,780
Joined:Sep 2006
|
Message Posted: Feb 27, 2012 7:18:07 PM
Gas_Buddy wrote > I have no agenda other than to try to be fair and factual, expressing opinions as being completely different from factual (which doesn't allow for shades of opinion).
This seems inherently contradictory. Please explain.
Gas_Buddy wrote > But, just asking, you don't push your points of view? In this or other topics?
Yes, but I try to stick to the topic of the OP. I try not to hijack a thread to push my views. If I am off topic, it is probably because someone else has gone off topic.
In this case, if you feel that new people should not be allowed to start topics, I suggest that you start a topic in SWSI, instead of making back handed comments in other threads. I have made this suggestion to you in the past.
|
Gas_Buddy
Champion Author
Maryland
Posts:25,984
Points:3,036,015
Joined:Aug 2004
|
Message Posted: Feb 27, 2012 2:54:50 PM
I asked. And I have no agenda other than to try to be fair and factual, expressing opinions as being completely different from factual (which doesn't allow for shades of opinion).
But, just asking, you don't push your points of view? In this or other topics?
|
Scrapheap
Champion Author
Virginia
Posts:14,556
Points:2,360,780
Joined:Sep 2006
|
Message Posted: Feb 27, 2012 11:21:17 AM
Based on what I've read so far in this thread, there are a few issues.
1. There is a quartet of people with very controlling personalities that will seize on any opportunity to push an agenda that has already been discussed. There was no consensus on the issue when it was discussed. Their incessant whining in any thread they do not like is at least as bad as the originator of the thread.
2. If people are starting threads in incorrect forums, perhaps there is a problem with the forum itself? In this case, "Talk back to us" is hardly a descriptive name for giving feedback regarding the site.
3. Reading the few threads HEDGEHOGS has started, he strikes me as a troll. It would be better to either ban or ignore the troll than to discriminate against new members with such a poorly thought out suggestion. Have any of the quartet asked for him to be banned yet?
4. It was plainly obvious by the title that this thread should have been in the Suggest an Opinion Poll Question thread or the US Politics Forum. Any one of the quartet could have easily ignored this thread. If they had done so, it would be working its way off the front page already.
I have asked for this thread to be moved to the US Politics forum. Did any of the quartet do the same or are they more interested in pushing their own controlling agenda?
|
Gas_Buddy
Champion Author
Maryland
Posts:25,984
Points:3,036,015
Joined:Aug 2004
|
Message Posted: Feb 27, 2012 11:01:02 AM
To avoid any misunderstanding, what I wrote in the below post, regarding cynicism, was written entirely tongue in cheek. I fully agree that this topic provides more reasoning as to why members, new or long-term, should have a minimum of participation/activity before being able to start new topics. And, yes, I fully understand there are new members with valid concerns they want to address and do so properly.
But then I also wonder how so many new members "win" gas cards relative to the number of long-time and/or points-heavy members. But that's an issue for another time and another topic.
|
scoutmaster
Champion Author
Pittsburgh
Posts:81,372
Points:3,255,570
Joined:Mar 2003
|
Message Posted: Feb 27, 2012 10:41:03 AM
You are correct GB, HEDGEHOGS has been a member for almost five (5) years yest has failed to earned a full day's points thereby making HEDGEHOGS a new member based on his/her activity.
If there was something in place that required members (new or otherwise) to earn a minimum of 35,000 points before they started a topic (except the JFF category) this topic and many others like it would not exist. The result would be a cleaner message forum.
|
Gas_Buddy
Champion Author
Maryland
Posts:25,984
Points:3,036,015
Joined:Aug 2004
|
Message Posted: Feb 27, 2012 10:31:20 AM
If I can follow-up my earlier post, maxstar and bytebug commented on new users being reigned in from starting forum topics, especially in inappropriate categories. HEDGEHOGS isn't a new member; he's a member of long standing. As evidence of his long standing, rumbleseat posted the following in regards to one of the thoughtful topics HEDGEHOGS started: "Once again, evidence rookies should NOT be allowed to start original threads until they actually participate in the site by posting at least a day's worth of prices." And note that rumbleseat wrote his comment in April 2007.
Since that time (actually since July 2007), HEDGEHOGS has increased the number of his message posts to 4, and has already earned 630 points. HEDGEHOGS, maxstar and bytebug, is hardly a new member. He's a long-time member who has apparently and simply taken time to think out his comments before posting. And, his relative or comparative lack of gas price posting, normally indicative of new members, may be due to the possibility of his not having seen any gas prices, and he, thus, based his comment "does the rising prices..." on what he's read or heard from the media or from his friends.
Such cynicism.
|
Gas_Buddy
Champion Author
Maryland
Posts:25,984
Points:3,036,015
Joined:Aug 2004
|
Message Posted: Feb 27, 2012 10:09:46 AM
First, as indicated by others, this is a topic for the U.S. Politics category; it's not a "Talk back to us" issue.
Second, and more important, the post and the language used by HomelyGrits, regardless of what you think of the president or the administration, is entirely inappropriate for this website, let alone for this topic or this category.
[Edited by: Gas_Buddy at 2/27/2012 11:11:17 AM EST]
|
scoutmaster
Champion Author
Pittsburgh
Posts:81,372
Points:3,255,570
Joined:Mar 2003
|
Message Posted: Feb 27, 2012 7:14:06 AM
And the evidence mounts for not letting members who haven't reached a certain threshold start new topics.
|
HomelyGrits
Sophomore Author
Dayton
Posts:224
Points:44,055
Joined:Dec 2011
|
Message Posted: Feb 27, 2012 6:47:17 AM
That socialist POS has certainly done NOTHING to improve prices at the pump. Vote his sorry A$$ out in November!
|
maxstar
Champion Author
Chicago
Posts:18,496
Points:811,495
Joined:Feb 2011
|
Message Posted: Feb 27, 2012 1:45:51 AM
Hedgehogs: I agree with bytebug.
There has been an ongoing discussion about restricting new members from creating new topics. This thread lends support for such a restriction. You have been a member for 5 years and have fewer than 1days worth of points. Contribute to the site by updating points. Point information is far more useful to other members than a misplaced topic.
|
bytebug
Champion Author
Orange County
Posts:26,399
Points:4,125,580
Joined:Oct 2001
|
Message Posted: Feb 26, 2012 10:52:47 PM
Just more support for the idea that new users need to be reigned in from starting forum topic in inappropriate places…
|
buckeyecountry
Champion Author
Ohio
Posts:8,039
Points:702,155
Joined:May 2011
|
Message Posted: Feb 26, 2012 7:48:20 PM
answer.....US politics
[Edited by: buckeyecountry at 2/26/2012 8:55:04 PM EST]
|