COBF New Website

[Parsad]

Hi All,

 

The new COBF website is aiming to launch around September 1st.  Originally I had set the date for January 1st, but it has been moved up.  Depending on the beta tests of the new site, it should be up by then, but there might be a few delays.  I thought I would share with you what the new site will be like:

 

- No politics section and no politics on there...period!

- The look and design will be more like Microcap Club, but you do not have to submit ideas to be invited as a member

- Members who are currently on here, will be automatically transferred over to the new site as "members", including usernames and passwords, and will have access to a similar type of message board...the registration fee for new "members" will remain a one-time fee of $29.95, but it will be USD.

- Members can upgrade to "subscriber" for $19.95 USD per month or $199.50 USD per year...subscriber benefits will include:

 

Subscriber Benefits

 

- Access to stock selection competition with cash prizes

- Quarterly newsletter with interviews, articles from a handful of selected writers including stock selection ideas

- Access to private chat room to hold live online events for invited subscribers

- Live vlog interviews with investment managers, writers and myself

- Invites to private COBF events, including our Toronto dinner

- Access to the job postings section

- Access to the future COBF ETF by select COBF members

 

We are in the programming/design stage now.  If there are any other ideas or initiatives you would like to see incorporated, please let me know...for members, subscribers or both.  Cheers!

 

Sanjeev

[Ballinvarosig Investors]

- No politics section and no politics on there...period!

Thank God.

[SharperDingaan]

Nice to see.

Congratulations!

 

SD

 

[Morgan]

Very cool!

[Guest cherzeca]

very impressive.  will there be a difference in advertising on the free v premium?

[BG2008]

Parsad,

 

Do you mind sharing some big picture view on the decision to launch the new site?  No politics is definitely a good call. 

[Mephistopheles]

Great news!

[LC]

Congrats on the new development!

 

Some comments

-Removal of politics is for the best :D And I say this as someone who believes silence is best left "for the dead", but it is distracting here - I can see that point.

-Some items to consider would be "saving" posts/threads; upvoting/downvoting comments a la reddit

-I would urge you to reconsider how much segregation between members vs. subscribers. Usually the more you fragment a community, the worse it gets.

-I know you have tried some of these subscriber items before (events, job postings) with I presume little success (maybe I am wrong here). I do not think having members pay more to access those items will improve their success rate. I would suggest reconsidering how these items are delivered to forum viewers.

-One more point: there have been a few threads about the decline in COBF quality. One event which is left out of these threads is the reduction in your (Sanjeev) direct forum participation - naturally due to your duties and legal limitations. In my opinion, you were the best, "natural" moderator of behavior. This site needs a behavioral role model, which you previously were. Just something to think on!

 

Good luck with the UAT and new launch!

[rkbabang]

Hi Sanjeev,  Will the posts from this site still be available somewhere, either carried over to the new site or this site maintained as read only? I often find older discussions useful and I frequently use the search box to find them. Thanks!

[Guest cherzeca]

perhaps consider a subscriber-only model.  say $100/yr.  or limit # of posts of nonsubscribers.  might improve quality of board posting

[Liberty]

perhaps consider a subscriber-only model.  say $100/yr.  or limit # of posts of nonsubscribers.  might improve quality of board posting

 

Either that, or rapidly kill the site because you lose critical mass and attrition isn't replaced by new blood. Pretty big gamble.

 

Making something more exclusive and expensive doesn't automatically make it better. All the good contributions of the past on this site were done by people who just joined for free.

 

I think the funk that this site is in is as I described in the other thread here:

 

https://www.cornerofberkshireandfairfax.ca/forum/general-discussion/not-an-investment-board/msg422378/#msg422378

 

The main problem with this forum right now is that it is heavily rooted in the traditional value way, and traditional value has been underperforming for over a decade. That doesn't help. Back when value was doing much better (in the rebound of the GFC, for example), this board had a lot more investing-idea activity, but I'm guessing most members are not finding much of interest through that lens these days..

 

Almost all my investments today wouldn't be considered traditional value, and when I discuss them here, I don't get much reaction. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

If traditional value starts doing well again and there's a bunch of opportunities in that area, I expect the posting on this board to become quite valuable. In the meantime, it's just resting a bit.

[SharperDingaan]

Congrats on the new development!

 

Some comments

-Removal of politics is for the best :D And I say this as someone who believes silence is best left "for the dead", but it is distracting here - I can see that point.

-Some items to consider would be "saving" posts/threads; upvoting/downvoting comments a la reddit

-I would urge you to reconsider how much segregation between members vs. subscribers. Usually the more you fragment a community, the worse it gets.

-I know you have tried some of these subscriber items before (events, job postings) with I presume little success (maybe I am wrong here). I do not think having members pay more to access those items will improve their success rate. I would suggest reconsidering how these items are delivered to forum viewers.

-One more point: there have been a few threads about the decline in COBF quality. One event which is left out of these threads is the reduction in your (Sanjeev) direct forum participation - naturally due to your duties and legal limitations. In my opinion, you were the best, "natural" moderator of behavior. This site needs a behavioral role model, which you previously were. Just something to think on!

 

Good luck with the UAT and new launch!

 

Just to add to this ...

 

Consider upvoting/downvoting + an algorithm as the self-regulating mechanism - by which to move people between tiers. 3 tiers at a different annual subscription rate/year - Tier 1 at zero cost, Tier 2 at $$, Tier 3 at $$$$. You can buy access to a tier, but if behave like an asshole the algorithm bounces you down to a lower tier. Do quality posts, and the algorithm bounces you up a tier (& free of charge for however long you remain in that elevated tier). Incentive driven behaviour, and costs covered.

 

Consider a similar override algorithm for the controversial. A NYC is what it is, because their ain't no shrinking violets, it is very 'grounded', and they ain't above telling anybody off - directly, and with panache :) It is the antidote to echo-chambers.

 

SD

 

 

 

[Liberty]

Just to add to this ...

 

Consider upvoting/downvoting + an algorithm as the self-regulating mechanism - by which to move people between tiers. 3 tiers at a different annual subscription rate/year - Tier 1 at zero cost, Tier 2 at $$, Tier 3 at $$$$. You can buy access to a tier, but if behave like an asshole the algorithm bounces you down to a lower tier. Do quality posts, and the algorithm bounces you up a tier (& free of charge for however long you remain in that elevated tier). Incentive driven behaviour, and costs covered.

 

Consider a similar override algorithm for the controversial. A NYC is what it is, because their ain't no shrinking violets, it is very 'grounded', and they ain't above telling anybody off - directly, and with panache :) It is the antidote to echo-chambers.

 

SD

 

This is just creating incentives for a circle jerk with no opposing viewpoints, or a small clique turning warlord and silencing everybody (because many won't want to pay for a formerly free service and just leave) they don't like by coordinating downvoting. Terrible idea.

[LC]

Not a fan of SD’s take but I think some way for the community to provide feedback to each other is valuable.

 

Perhaps simply an upvote button, but no downvote?

 

And unlike Reddit where comments are re-arranged based on votes, perhaps we can maintain the timeline of posts (ie no rearranging).

 

But at least this way you can go into a topic and see what the community thinks the “best” posts on that topic are. And you can make it searchable.

[bizaro86]

I definitely like the ability to read posts in chronological order. Some sort of "thanks" or "like" system would be a good idea. If you publish a leaderboard, that might incent quality posts?

[Guest cherzeca]

I definitely like the ability to read posts in chronological order. Some sort of "thanks" or "like" system would be a good idea. If you publish a leaderboard, that might incent quality posts?

 

especially if a certain number of "leaders" get free subs for next year

[Liberty]

Not a fan of SD’s take but I think some way for the community to provide feedback to each other is valuable.

 

Perhaps simply an upvote button, but no downvote?

 

And unlike Reddit where comments are re-arranged based on votes, perhaps we can maintain the timeline of posts (ie no rearranging).

 

But at least this way you can go into a topic and see what the community thinks the “best” posts on that topic are. And you can make it searchable.

 

Yeah, there's a french-language forum that I frequent that has the ability to upvote things. It doesn't do much, doesn't feed into a huge algorithm and things aren't sorted by votes, but it's a nice positive feedback and encourages good behavior and adding value.

[Jurgis]

Not a fan of SD’s take but I think some way for the community to provide feedback to each other is valuable.

 

Perhaps simply an upvote button, but no downvote?

 

And unlike Reddit where comments are re-arranged based on votes, perhaps we can maintain the timeline of posts (ie no rearranging).

 

But at least this way you can go into a topic and see what the community thinks the “best” posts on that topic are. And you can make it searchable.

 

Yeah, there's a french-language forum that I frequent that has the ability to upvote things. It doesn't do much, doesn't feed into a huge algorithm and things aren't sorted by votes, but it's a nice positive feedback and encourages good behavior and adding value.

 

SiliconInvestor allows upvoting. I think it's OK though there's still a possibility of cliquish behavior. Might not be a big issue with politics gone. Although I think there will be some abuse in battleground stocks.

[tooskinneejs]

One thing that drives me bananas is when posts "quote" (i.e., copy) a chain of 10 other prior posts instead of just quoting a pertinent sentence or two to which they are replying.  Maybe this is something that can be improved in the COBF 3.0.

[LC]

One thing that drives me bananas is when posts "quote" (i.e., copy) a chain of 10 other prior posts instead of just quoting a pertinent sentence or two to which they are replying.  Maybe this is something that can be improved in the COBF 3.0.

 

Yes, if I highlight a sentence and click "quote", the text box should only have the highlighted sentence featured as the quote.

 

Another one is auto-scaling of images (prevents posting an image and having it blow up the viewing screen).

[SharperDingaan]

Behavioural conditioning requires both rewards and penalties. It can't be one side of the coin only.

It is also a simple task to add 'circuit breakers' into the conditioning process, as already occurs on the major exchanges.

Sure, it is not libertarian - but neither is the 'real world. It's just an alternative approach, that also solves some practical problems.

 

An echo-chamber is of no value - to anybody.

Game in/out friends/undesirables, and you just destroy the value of your time and reputation invested. Self correction.

Different strokes.

 

SD

 

 

[Jurgis]

One thing that drives me bananas is when posts "quote" (i.e., copy) a chain of 10 other prior posts instead of just quoting a pertinent sentence or two to which they are replying.  Maybe this is something that can be improved in the COBF 3.0.

 

Yes, if I highlight a sentence and click "quote", the text box should only have the highlighted sentence featured as the quote.

 

Another one is auto-scaling of images (prevents posting an image and having it blow up the viewing screen).

 

I hope Sanjeev is not spending money to implement a forum engine from scratch. If he is, then it's IMO a waste of time and money. And the upkeep/fixes/maintenance is likely to be money pit too.

 

OTOH, if CoBF is going to use off-the-shelf engine, then the engine-specific features in the wish list are pretty much DOA.

[Liberty]

SiliconInvestor allows upvoting. I think it's OK though there's still a possibility of cliquish behavior. Might not be a big issue with politics gone. Although I think there will be some abuse in battleground stocks.

 

If you can only give people a star and it doesn't do anything else, I don't think the potential for abuse is very high.

 

Worst case, a group of aligned-trolls all upvote each other all the time and their posts constantly have 4-5 stars, and everybody learns over time what is going on and ignores that signal.

[Liberty]

Another one is auto-scaling of images (prevents posting an image and having it blow up the viewing screen).

 

A way to scale images would be useful. I always end up with huge images hosted somewhere else that I wish I could resize quickly, and I don't always have the time to resize locally and re-upload somewhere else.

[Liberty]

Behavioural conditioning requires both rewards and penalties. It can't be one side of the coin only.

It is also a simple task to add 'circuit breakers' into the conditioning process, as already occurs on the major exchanges.

Sure, it is not libertarian - but neither is the 'real world. It's just an alternative approach, that also solves some practical problems.

 

An echo-chamber is of no value - to anybody.

Game in/out friends/undesirables, and you just destroy the value of your time and reputation invested. Self correction.

Different strokes.

 

SD

 

This is wrong. I've been participating on online communities since USENET and BBSes and forums in the 1990s. Your theory doesn't actually work in practice. What you propose does create an echo chamber because it's a positive feedback loop that boosts signal of the same type and discourage divergent takes.