[jauntywundrkind]

No, I'm saying they are hyping up some random podcast while saying sweet nothings. I really don't like empty hype. I want some actual content to posts that actually says something, not just links breathlessly encouraging me to go spend an hour listening.

[arowatbk]

Not sure where you get the breathless bit from. If you don't want to listen, then don't. If you want me to summarize everything for you and give you the bullet points that is also something that will take more time than I am willing to commit at the moment. You can listen to it, or not. No skin off my back. The irony with some of the commentary is along the lines of "don't listen to influencers" and the like. I provided a link to (what I feel to be) a very worthwhile listen that is the antithesis of the grab-a-headline news of late. I have no connection to this particular podcast and have listened to a handful of episodes over the years on subjects that interest me. This particular subject (Huge IPOs, what is or isn't tracked, what float is, etc) turns out to be a relatively deep domain and there are inherent tradeoffs between different approaches. That's all.

[adampunk]

And where did the ad hominem part arise?

[ivewonyoung]

https://human.libretexts.org/Under_Construction/Clean_Up_(Pr...

Search for "positive ad hominem".

[jauntywundrkind]

It's all empty words.

> a very thorough and nuanced discussion

> bunch of smart investment / finance guys

> No click-bait-sky-is-falling content.

The middle one is the ad-hominem puffery. The rest isn't quite exactly 100% 'of the person's, but still doesn't give me any actual leads into what the content is: its just empty puffery.

[possibleworlds]

> vacuous empty comments > saying sweet nothings > empty puffery

By definition the only ad-hominem comments to be seen anywhere above.