The reference to you was indeed petty. My apologies for that.
1 Like
I just posted in the European security situation section, mentioning that Finland is about to buy a huge batch (tens of thousands) of man-portable anti-tank weapons. I mentioned the main competitors and investment potential. One is the unlisted German Dynamit Nobel. The other is SAAB. The post was removed by the administration. Why, one might ask??
4 Likes
I can also write that Finland will buy a nuclear weapon very soon. Without any source, it will surely be removed from the thread. Even if I listed the biggest nuclear weapon states.
On the other hand, the whole thread is quite off-topic when discussing the impact of Finlandâs military service on GDP. Statistical trickery that neither creates nor diminishes Finlandâs security. Or does Putin think that Finland cannot be attacked when 5% of its GDP goes to defense spending?
5 Likes
The good old flagging discussion is time to dig out from the bottom of the barrel again due to the July heatwaves, and what else would one do on the last Saturday of July. 
In the Withsecure discussion, feelings have been hurt again about flagging, and reasons are given why the forum has acted as it has.
Letâs start by digging out the forum rules.
https://keskustelut.inderes.fi/t/sijoitusfoorumin-saannot-faq-guidelines/5
1. Maintaining a high-quality and clean discussion
Always strive to improve the discussion in some way, no matter how small the action. If you are unsure whether your message adds value to the discussion, itâs better not to send it.
According to the forum rules, this is not the case, why has this been done? So that the discussion could produce added value and the famous swarm intelligence could dig out some added value from the companyâs business. Weekly shouting that the stock will soon go to the moon for reason x or that someone made a mistake selling their stocks and criticizes the company just for the sake of criticizing, while the company has not got its own game in order during many years of the cybersecurity supercycle, then the fault is not with the critic. 
Itâs great that the investment target arouses passions; perhaps they could be channeled towards why the companyâs business isnât performing? Why hasnât Withsecure performed as well as its competitors in growth, and why does the company appear to be a chronic underperformer that just burns cash? In what year will the company start growing again in terms of top-line, and what will the company have done right then?
Perhaps the company could even get some ideas from these discussions, and I would genuinely like to read a good presentation arguing why this would be a 2⏠stock, for example, in three years. Just shouting into the wind that people are idiots for not seeing its value is fruitless, and there are other platforms for such discussions.
Indeed, thatâs why a separate âhype threadâ has been created for stock price changes or cursing stagnation, which has over 30,000 messages of hype!
https://keskustelut.inderes.fi/t/kurssien-ja-niiden-muutosten-kyselyt-kauhistelut-ja-hehkuttelut-osa-4/61881
Although Salkunvartija (Portfolio Manager) came up as an example here, I hope he doesnât take offense but tries to see this as an opportunity to learn. When passion is channeled in a slightly more constructive direction, it brings a lot more value to the forum.
P.S. In the future, the flagging finger will be even more sensitive in the said thread.
23 Likes
All moderation policies have their weaknesses. In my opinion, comments have been removed from me without cause. The worst comments have been left hanging on the forum, which is an even greater harm to the community than the previous one. Life goes on. No great literary history has disappeared from the universe.
10 Likes
Hey there!
Iâm throwing out a development suggestion to my friend @Sijoittaja-alokas and moderator @Verneri_Pulkkinen regarding moderation.
What value do link posts have where the content of the link is not properly explained? Such âgood news + linkâ posts severely degrade company threads. They have no added value to the discussion and therefore could be removed with a stern warning. Those messages give a chat-like feeling, and that shouldnât be the case on the Inderes forum 
A development suggestion also for fellow contributors. If you donât feel like participating in the discussion about a company, then donât participate, and in that case, you can completely leave out that one-sentence link post.
35 Likes
I gave the same feedback to Alokas today. Fortunately, others have noticed the same too 
12 Likes
Hello!
And @Johannes_Sippola and other moderators. Thank you for writing here too. 
Yep!
These are perhaps in the top 3 reasons why a message gets deleted, i.e., messages (there have been several of these today):
- just a link
- short message without added value
If a news item is very short and the link itself opens so that the main point is visible directly without clicking it, then the referencing doesnât need to be very long.
Then again, for a 20-page article, itâs good to refer a bit more comprehensively, for example, why itâs worth reading or opening.
Itâs quite important to mention paywalls, i.e., sometimes, for example, 5 percent have reading rights, so the remaining 95 percent click in vain.
Then of course, it must be remembered that the article should not be copied directly here in large parts or especially in its entirety, or huge screenshots taken, but a link, a small reference in your own words, and a moderate quote can be okay.
Some cases are borderline regarding how much and how to refer, but no mere links, mentions of paywalls⊠of course, those who donât have paywalls donât always notice themselves, but thatâs why referencing is especially important.
Letâs say that good referencing is such that you donât click unnecessarily. Common sense and thinking of others go a long way. There are small differences in taste in these matters, but @JHeiskanenâs thoughts go a long way. @Pandakarhu posted a good message about the exact same thing. 
Thanks and have a great weekend! 
20 Likes
Trivial: in hyperbolia (hyperbole) messages have long been the kind that go in one ear and out the other for me (or should I say eye, when talking about a forum), but baseless accusations of criminal activity are starting to be so tasteless that in my opinion, moderators should start intervening more strictly in this behavior.
4 Likes
Old message, but amen! Few things improve the quality of forum discussion as much as a ban on posting just images, videos, and links. Referencing helps in many ways:
- saves every other readerâs time and effort, as not everyone has to search for the relevant thing in a 4-hour video and waste half an hour browsing
- tells why a link is relevant to the discussion at all. If you canât explain this, you shouldnât post at all.
- conveys the essential point concisely and quickly. Those who want more information or confirmation can read more from the source. Or correct the original writer if they misunderstood the source.
- polite to everyone else
- Helps when linked content is removed or stops working
I think this rule is so crucially important that I would automatically delete all unreferenced links/images/news and give a 6-hour ban for breaking the rule.
An exception would be some fun picture thread whose content consists of meme images, for example.
18 Likes
One can only wonder why the administration hasnât intervened if theyâve been observing from the sidelines for so long? Itâs a complete mystery to me how, for example, the personal attack style of the âEmperorâ in question has been allowed for years, and then people wonder when it gets reactions. Even now, his latest responses have not been addressed in any way. The âmoderationâ in that thread has long been about one âPlease be a bit nicer hereâ message per quarter, but letâs hope this really changes now.
4 Likes
This is partly related, @Kasleew, to the dilemma that if I were to genuinely start using a more sensitive banhammer retroactively, then a great many users would be sent to the penalty box at once. Some for simply abysmal quality posts, many for ad hominems, etc. (so definitely not just @Seinakadun_Keisari, even though many like to claim heâs the only one who engages in such behavior). This is a kind of balancing act, what kind of oversteps are allowed, or rather, what actions are taken to deal with them.
12 Likes
There wouldnât be any sense in retroactive punishments, and I havenât suggested any. You yourself list excesses that many have apparently been guilty of in the thread, so I just wondered why they arenât addressed? Itâs a bit tragicomic when a moderator complains that there are many excesses in the thread. Wouldnât it be precisely your/your teamâs job to keep those excesses in check?
I havenât claimed such a thing, but admittedly, that particular character is quite often involved when discussions escalate. And unfortunately, this has been the case for years.
3 Likes
So, if the situation simply cannot be brought under control with the forumâs normal disciplinary actions, meaning primarily simplifying by reminding people of the rules and banning repeated blatant rule violations (as elsewhere on the Forum), then practically a decision has to be made whether to implement stricter measures or to wait a while to see if people will come to their senses and calm down after some individual dispute or similar, as one would expect from adults â in other words, more readily distributing bans is the next step if the aforementioned doesnât happen, and we are now moving to that for the Tesla thread.
It is also generally good that decision-making power is exercised by more than one moderator/staff member â for example, if it were solely in my hands, dozens of people from that thread would already be on a very long timeout. But moderation must also be carried out sensibly, and most often it is best achieved in cooperation with other moderators.
6 Likes
The discussion related to Tesla seems to be strongly divided into two opposing camps. These different sides seem to find it difficult to listen to views that differ from their own opinions and thoughts. Very easily, those who have presented different views are criticized and dismissed with various remarks, sometimes quite arrogantly.
Moderation in these matters probably belongs to the administration, so hopefully the mod remains neutral and separates personal attacks etc. from normal views related to the companyâs value and capabilities, which should be welcome on the forum.
However, having read the messages from the last 24 hours, I cannot see that the Emperor of SeinÀkatu, while defending against Sku
2 Likes
. I completely agree with this. That is truly shocking writing, and I find it utterly impossible to understand how this can be allowed on an otherwise high-quality forum. Thereâs no way to see that this brings any added value to the discussion, which the forum rules nevertheless require.
Iâm even starting to consider what actions I could take myself if itâs truly okay from Inderesâ values perspective that other debaters are directly labeled as insane and dim-witted. Such behavior should absolutely not belong on Inderesâ forums.
7 Likes
No one has done that, at least not in the linked message. âAntipathiesâ refers to @skuuppiâs continuous habit of bringing completely irrelevant things into the discussion, the best example being references to Oroco, which he apparently uses to needle me. This particular message was a response to yet another message from the same user, where he once again threw out completely irrelevant things that had nothing to do with the topic. Itâs worth following the discussion a bit more closely to understand the background.
As for @Jukka_Lepikkoâs message, itâs tragicomic that he asks for my removal from the forum, when his own contribution to the Tesla thread has been about zero lately, and he doesnât even discuss, but mainly appears in the thread when thereâs positive news or when the stock price has risen sharply. He doesnât answer questions, doesnât justify his claims, i.e., he doesnât discuss. I know Jukka is deeply annoyed that he canât freely talk about Tesla matters without his incorrect claims being brought up and corrected; he likes to present himself as a leading Tesla expert, and it doesnât quite fit that someone else knows things better.
I have completely ignored many Tesla writers because they rarely have anything to contribute to the actual topic. The problem is really that there are very few Tesla bulls in the thread who actually know what they are talking about and can genuinely discuss. Instead, there are more of these lurkers who flag my messages and/or send all kinds of crap privately.
As for the linked messages, yes, itâs clear that some of them should have been left unwritten. Perhaps it started to annoy me a bit that writers who should be following things closely started whining that I hadnât written about things on the forum that were widely known.
23 Likes
I didnât doubt for a moment that you wouldnât have an explanation ready for why you can advise other people to âtalk to a professionalâ about their antipathies. Nor did I assume for a moment that you wouldnât have a ready attack against me, explaining why I donât have the right to write my view. In your long message, you largely discuss the shortcomings of everyone else rather than your own writings, well, perhaps you have the right to do so in this thread (everyone is free to choose their own defense speech). However, nothing Jukka Lepikko has written or failed to write can justify to me why other people can be disparaged and insulted in such a way.
My message, however, was not directed at you, but at the moderators. @Sijoittaja-alokas , @Johannes_Sippola, @Verneri_Pulkkinen (letâs include at least one paid person here). I do not intend to continue this discussion with you, as it was not my intention to have it in the first place.
If such repeated and persistent vulgar commenting by other participants is allowed, it is, in my opinion, a question larger than a single moderation decision and directly concerns Inderesâ mission and values.
9 Likes
What if you just limited this theatrical outrage a bit yourself? I already told you what it was about and what was being referred to.
I did not attack you in any way, nor have I ever said that you do not have the right to write your views.
How are these things related? In my message, I discussed two different writers by name on completely different topics.
This is now pure hyperbole without any justification, it doesnât help the discussion in any way.
10 Likes