On 12 Oct, 03:45, Dawlish wrote:

Why should I engage with someone who has such a grudge and cannot
appreciate a different opinion to their own, but I will reply?

I bear no grudge to your forecasting opinion. Much like you've not
managed to find an example of me having a dig at your forecast that
went wrong, I bear no grudge, I just don't agree with how you verify
your method.

You say
I "brag" - which I certainly don't. I've just returned to every one of
the 92 forecasts over 5 years, which have a 78% success rate over the
times I've forecasted: fact.

As you've told us over and over again. And I maintain that this is an
accurate guide to your accuracy. Judge yourself by how all other
forecasting houses are judged: over every day of every year. Why don't
you try and do that instead?

That's hardly a "brag", but you don't
like that figure, do you?

I don't because it's an incorrect guide to the accuracy. I have no
iota of jealousy towards your accuracy because it's not an accurate
measuring of forecasting accuracy. I do wonder sometimes whether I'm
talking to a brick wall.

Neither do a few others and that's just
tough. The fact won't change. Outcome success percentage is the only
judge of forecasting success and I see other individuals (whom I don't
compete with at all and always say so) claiming success with no decent
outcome success. I'll challenge that with good reason. I know you
don't like the word "outcomes" either, but that's not my problem.

For outcomes, read "selective outcomes".

You won't try it as you *know* you'll make more mistakes
than I do.

How wonderfully, wonderfully arrogant of you. Do you ever wonder why
people don't take much of a shine to you?

If you ever do decide to criticise; expect a robust defence. No
foulness, no abuse from me, ever, even under the worst provocation
imaginable (and you see it and by your silence, condone it. That
really does get ignored.)

The thing is whenever I do criticise, you go incredibly, incredibly
defensive. Maybe you don't notice it.

Richard