Pat Veling is paranoid, or he has OD'd on the Kool-Aid

NEW -> Contingent Buyer Assistance Program
[quote author="Pat Veling" date=1213137666]You accused me of saying you have anger management issues. I think your recent posts above sort of speak for themselves. (Any rational person would agree. Have you re-read your posts?)</blockquote>


Call me irrational. Colorful <a href="http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/rhetoric">rhetoric</a> and anger are two different things.



At this point, you might as well just sniff condescendingly in Graph's general direction and say, "My well researched data and established theories are too highly regarded to be inspected by you ignorant upstart hacks" and call it a day. You don't have to draw pistols every time somebody throws a glove down. Will you be mocked? Likely. But you're getting that now. Kind of a bummer that it's not going to happen though. One would have hoped that you would have been willing to test your theories.



And really, Leslie Appleton Young?!? When looking to establish gravitas, that is not a name I would be inclined to pull out of my hat.
 
McMansion:



You believe that No_Vaseline's calling me a ?weasely piece of shit who can?t be trusted? and ?a walking waste of human skin? to be colorful rhetoric? OK. Thanks for chiming in.
 
It's not my style nor something I would find particularly persuasive, but it's not "angry," which is how you characterized it. Believe me, we've seen angry, and that ain't it. I thought you were doing a pretty good job of holding your own. It's not very easy to defend a position that is not particularly defensible, especially on your antagonist's home court.
 
yes, its colorful rhetoric. just like your "have a great day!" is so obviously one part politeness and one part smugness.
 
[quote author="Pat Veling" date=1213137666]No_Vaseline:



Calling me a "weasely piece of shit who can?t be trusted" and "a walking waste of human skin" is not the best way to get me to jump through hoops.</blockquote>


I'm not trying to get you to do anything. I'm just pointing out the facts. In an aggressive, in your face style. We'll get back to that in a minute.



<blockquote>But, regarding your three options above....



1) Ain't gonna happen. See Lansner's blog this morning as to why Graphrix has set this up so that I am unable to accept his one term.

2) Deny what -- specifically -- outright? Sorry, but I do not follow.</blockquote>


Accept = your TERM is acceptable, we have a deal.

Deny = your TERM is unacceptable, we do not have a deal.



I consider this issue dead. I also think you deal in bad faith. It is my opinion your only reason to meet with Graph is because he is part of the lending industrial complex and your whole motivation to have this meeting is to use this information to cull favor with his employer. You initially made the offer to me, then rescinded it, remember? We?ll get back to that later.



Since your word is shit on everything else you say/write/are interviewed on, I consider you shit and will refer to you as such any chance I get.



<blockquote>3) Much of what you ask regarding my firm's offering was posted on Lanser's blog late yesterday, in response to Bill's question.



You accused me of saying you have anger management issues. I think your recent posts above sort of speak for themselves. (Any rational person would agree. Have you re-read your posts?) </blockquote>


I'm not accusing you of anything. I'm just restating the facts. Have you re-read your posts?



<blockquote>You really need to calm down. Jeez.



<snip>



Not sure I will take you up on it, though, with such a hothead approach to all of this.</blockquote>


At least I can keep my story straight. Oh, and my word is good too.



Further, in addition to the falsehoods you write, you have made several errors of logic, most often "false cause". <a href="http://eagar.mit.edu/EagarPresentations/tweagarwriting/logic.html">http://eagar.mit.edu/EagarPresentations/tweagarwriting/logic.html</a> Let's redact your last sentence for clarity, shall we?



<blockquote>(Any rational person would agree <strong>that you are aggressivley forcing the issue that I have issues telling the truth, and I don't like it one bit you are pointing out that I'm either inconsistant, incompetnet, or a bold faced liar</strong>. Have you re-read your posts<strong>because hopefully by pointing out you are interacting with me in an an agressive fashion my factual inconsistancies will fade into obscurity</strong>?) </blockquote>


BTW, I accept your offer. Remember this one?



<blockquote>"Haven?t seen No_Vaseline today. Wonder why? He keeps asking me to have coffee with him?or to buy him lunch at The Hat. I may agree, if he will do so at The Hat in Brea. It would have to be dutch, though. We?ll see if he replies. Maybe we can all meet there and have a battle royal? Watch here for schedule details. "</blockquote>


See?



Pat Veling?s word is no good. Can't keep his facts straight. Deals in bad faith. Data is wrong and unactionable. Zero credibility.
 
[quote author="Pat Veling" date=1213140452]McMansion:</blockquote>


Who is McMansion? Are you refering to Eva? You can't even get that right! How am I supposed to have any faith in your redacted MLS results if you can't get something simple like 'cut and paste'.



<blockquote>You believe that No_Vaseline's calling me a ?weasely piece of shit who can?t be trusted? and ?a walking waste of human skin? to be colorful rhetoric? OK. Thanks for chiming in.</blockquote>


I work in a world of facts, with a pinch of trust. From my observation/interaction with you, you haven't helped yourself in either column. If you think I'm being hard on you, you should see the grad school paper I wrote on the lack of accounting transparency/consulting and a company called Enron in 1998. I couldn't understand what they did either, and history has proven that apparently nobody else could either.
 
No_Vaseline:



Well....I now know more than I did. I have no idea who Graphrix is, or that he is part of the lending industrial complex. He only told me he was "in the industry."



Seeing as you have written that you are willing to identify yourself in advance of a meeting, and that you have no issues with post-meeting anonymity, I will stick to my offer of meeting with you, just to hear you out. Let's meet in my office instead, for reasons which should be obvious here.



Send me an email with a scanned copy of your Driver's License and some links to whatever it is that you do. You can post your own take on our meeting here after we are done. I am actually looking forward to it.



Sound fair?
 
Have what out? I could pick up the phone and answer in five sentences what I do, who my customers are (not by name either), what value I bring to the equation to my customers, and how my supply chain works. I am not thrilled to death I had to humiliuate you in a public place. It was totally unnecessary if you were {this much} less evasive. I don't want to know your industrial secrets, I just asked what the hell you did, who benifits from it, and why, because frankly I don't get it.



I'm really not thrilled I had to humiliating you into keeping your end of the bargain.



You may be aware we have a user here who formerly worked for a large RE company - a company who figured out he posted here, and took retalitory action. This users participation was as beign as it could be, and caused him 'material harm' once his employer found out about it. Gee, I wonder why somebody who participated here who was "in the industry" or "in the lending industrial complex" or "sold commmercial real estate" or "managed the Mountain View Tire on Chapman in Orange" wouldn't want to be outed? Maybe because he's afraid you'll tell that kook Truthiness where he lives? I wonder.



I offered to buy you coffee (in a public place, for obvious reasons) and give you fifteen minutes. You could likely get me off your back if you'd just ask a couple of simple questions. I have nothing to hide, but I frankly don't want to talk to you. We could fix it here and I would send you a $20 gift card for your trouble and call it even.



I don't have time to trifle with people I don't trust, and I'm sorry to write this, but I do not trust you. I am going to have to think about your offer till this afternoon.
 
No_Vaseline:



Wow.



That's all I can say.



If I change the venue to The Hat in Brea, will you reconsider? I will buy your pastrami. Really.



I am not aware of any security issues with any participants here. I have only been a member for a few days.



Just for clarification, you wrote on Lanser's blog --



"I?ll contact somebody at Pat?s company, provide my contact information INCLUDING a copy of my CDL and a business card and even a resume if they want it. They can check me out to thier hearts content.



I?ll pick up the whole check.



All I ask is that Pat explain to me what it is he does and bills for. He should be able to explain to my pea sized brain in no more than three sentences, so as to not distract from Graph and Pat?s conversation. I ask permission to take written notes.



If Pat wants, he can bring somebody who will also remain silent (and be subject to the same vetting as I?m offering myself up to).



I?ve got nothing personal against Pat (how could I? I never met the guy!) but I have issues with him taking stuff out of context and making representations (about me in particular) that don?t pass the sniff test."



Seems like I have met your terms.
 
[quote author="EvaLSeraphim" date=1213138956]And really, Leslie Appleton Young?!? When looking to establish gravitas, that is not a name I would be inclined to pull out of my hat.</blockquote>


No sh*t. At least she has the decency to admit, like Walter Hahn, that her head was in the sand and that she was wrong, very, very wrong.
 
[quote author="skek" date=1213143547]It's a shame this thread seems to have gotten off-track. I would have enjoyed reading an actual data vs. data, analysis vs. analysis debate on the merits. Oh well.</blockquote>


Hopefully I can get it back on track. I have a bunch of thoughts in my head, and once I can put them all together in one post, it should make for a pleasantly surprising data smack down.



I do not know if Pat went to school for economics, but I know Steve "broken econometric model" Thomas did, and both leave out a very important variable in their models. Which, if they did include it, it would show that things appear to be improving but factoring in that variable would in fact show that it is getting worse. And, I am not talking about a complex linear regression model, but I am talking about a simple aggregate supply and aggregate demand curve model that shows where the equilibrium is or should be. The problem is they are not using aggregate supply, and they use only one variable of supply. AS & AD curves are econ 101, and not <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_stochastic_general_equilibrium">econ 501 on dynamic stochastic general equilibrium</a>.
 
[quote author="Pat Veling" date=1213145785]No_Vaseline:



Wow.



That's all I can say.



If I change the venue to The Hat in Brea, will you reconsider? I will buy your pastrami. Really.



I am not aware of any security issues with any participants here. I have only been a member for a few days.



Just for clarification, you wrote on Lanser's blog --



"I?ll contact somebody at Pat?s company, provide my contact information INCLUDING a copy of my CDL and a business card and even a resume if they want it. They can check me out to thier hearts content.



I?ll pick up the whole check.



All I ask is that Pat explain to me what it is he does and bills for. He should be able to explain to my pea sized brain in no more than three sentences, so as to not distract from Graph and Pat?s conversation. I ask permission to take written notes.



If Pat wants, he can bring somebody who will also remain silent (and be subject to the same vetting as I?m offering myself up to).



I?ve got nothing personal against Pat (how could I? I never met the guy!) but I have issues with him taking stuff out of context and making representations (about me in particular) that don?t pass the sniff test."



Seems like I have met your terms.</blockquote>


Then you posted I was not invited - you uninvited me. Now you're reinviting me.



I'm not digging the passive agressive tact of negoitaitions this took, which (to me) has materially changed the scope of the meeting. This isn't a big deal, but its certainly different than what I proposed because events have tranpired to change it. I feel yanked around, and don't like it.



I need the afternoon to think about it.
 
[quote author="graphrix" date=1213147313][quote author="skek" date=1213143547]It's a shame this thread seems to have gotten off-track. I would have enjoyed reading an actual data vs. data, analysis vs. analysis debate on the merits. Oh well.</blockquote>


Hopefully I can get it back on track. I have a bunch of thoughts in my head, and once I can put them all together in one post, it should make for a pleasantly surprising data smack down.



I do not know if Pat went to school for economics, but I know Steve "broken econometric model" Thomas did, and both leave out a very important variable in their models. Which, if they did include it, it would show that things appear to be improving but factoring in that variable would in fact show that it is getting worse. And, I am not talking about a complex linear regression model, but I am talking about a simple aggregate supply and aggregate demand curve model that shows where the equilibrium is or should be. The problem is they are not using aggregate supply, and they use only one variable of supply. AS & AD curves are econ 101, and not <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_stochastic_general_equilibrium">econ 501 on dynamic stochastic general equilibrium</a>.</blockquote>


wow, you guys are really making me drag up my old math books (Stat 1, 2, 3) and a bit of calculus....



Nice work though.

-bix
 
Why does anyone want to meet with this guy? Sounds like a waste of time to me.


NoV and G - I will take you both to lunch at The Hat in Lake Forest on Friday at 11:30 am; my treat.
 
[quote author="awgee" date=1213153783]Why does anyone want to meet with this guy? Sounds like a waste of time to me.


NoV and G - I will take you both to lunch at The Hat in Lake Forest on Friday at 11:30 am; my treat.</blockquote>


oooh oooh, can I come along?? :) I need to take a day off and go see a movie. I'll introduce NoV to the turbo mustang or stinky charged mustang...

-bix
 
In this day and age of identity theft, no one should be faxing copies of their CDL's to <em>anyone</em>.



Pat, I know No Vas. Don't worry, he's not going to beat you up. Sheesh.
 
World's Most Boring Lunch Meetup:



PV : Thanks for finally meeting me.

GR : Thanks for meeting my term.

PV : Where do we start?

GR : You're an idiot.

PV : No, I'm not.

GR : Yes you are.

PV : No, I'm not.

GR : Well, then you're a hack.

PV : You got me. Yes I am.

GR : Really?

PV : No. Not really. You're an idiot.

GR : No, I'm not.

PV : ......

GR : ......

PV : ......

GR : ......
<fieldset class="gc-fieldset">
<legend> Attached files </legend> <a href="http://www.talkirvine.com/converted_files/images/forum_attachments/71_sCJnxma5oXMvyzVRiOym.jpg"><img src="http://www.talkirvine.com/converted_files/images/forum_attachments/71_sCJnxma5oXMvyzVRiOym.jpg" class="gc-images" title="twochairs.jpg" style="max-width:300px" /></a> </fieldset>
 
[quote author="IrvineRealtor" date=1213236561]World's Most Boring Lunch Meetup:</blockquote>


This is my spin...





PV : Thanks for finally meeting me.

GR : Thanks for meeting my term.

PV : Where do we start?

GR : You're an idiot.

PV : No, I'm not.

GR : Yes you are.

PV : No, I'm not.

GR : Well, then you're a hack.

PV : You got me. Yes I am.

GR : Really?

PV : No. Not really. You're an idiot.

GR : No, I'm not.

PV : ......

Bix: Don't make me nuke both of you...



ha ha

:)
 
[quote author="graphrix" date=1213147313][quote author="skek" date=1213143547]It's a shame this thread seems to have gotten off-track. I would have enjoyed reading an actual data vs. data, analysis vs. analysis debate on the merits. Oh well.</blockquote>


Hopefully I can get it back on track. I have a bunch of thoughts in my head, and once I can put them all together in one post, it should make for a pleasantly surprising data smack down.



I do not know if Pat went to school for economics, but I know Steve "broken econometric model" Thomas did, and both leave out a very important variable in their models. Which, if they did include it, it would show that things appear to be improving but factoring in that variable would in fact show that it is getting worse. And, I am not talking about a complex linear regression model, but I am talking about a simple aggregate supply and aggregate demand curve model that shows where the equilibrium is or should be. The problem is they are not using aggregate supply, and they use only one variable of supply. AS & AD curves are econ 101, and not <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_stochastic_general_equilibrium">econ 501 on dynamic stochastic general equilibrium</a>.</blockquote>


Hey graphcakes,

Can you post any of the econometric models in question? I'd like to have look.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top