what's up smogoff. recently while hammered I decided to buy 50 bucks worth of the first stock I saw on a random penny stock subreddit. obviously that was a genuinely idiotic idea and I'm down 21.83% in two weeks. there goes $10.
anyways, I wanted to figure out what the deal was with the stock, so I decided to do things like look at some data and look at the stock's performance over the past year (-93.98% lol). you might hear these things referred to as "due diligence"; most people do them before buying stocks, whereas I do them never. one of the more interesting things I encountered throughout the course of my research was the SEC form 4 disclosures for the stock
for anyone who doesn't know, SEC form 4 filings are basically public disclosures to the US government of insider trades. theponzi scheme stock market is theoretically supposed to have fair and equal availability of information, but some insiders to a company know things before everyone else, so if you're an insider you have to disclose trades you make to the US government (unless you're in Congress in which case you can do whatever you want)
looking through these form 4 filings, I found out that the CEO had bought just under $1 million worth of shares of this garbage stock, and had therefore lost just shy of $100 thousand in 14 days. that's right, 2.66 times the american yearly median income, in just 2 weeks.
impressed by this wallstreetbets-esque feat of stock trading prowess, I decided to look into my newly discovered chief executive officer's background. I felt that it was my duty to figure out which great pedagogues had instructed him, and which great laurels had been placed upon his brow.
also, scott anthony if you're reading this I want you to know that everything I say is in jest. nonchalantly losing 100k is very stupid and honestly kind of sickening, but at the same time your life is probably better than mine in 99% of ways so i'm not in a position to criticize.
my supposition that he would have a linkedin profile was, unsurprisingly, correct. i encountered a fetid swamp of incoherent and valueless business speak
but after wading through the verbosity I got to a bio page for scott anthony on a website called "thinkers50.com". my gaze was instantly captured:
RANKED COMPETITIVE THINKING! I had never heard of it before! step aside olympics! this is 500 times more impressive. descartes tells us that "I think, therefore, I am", so surely ranked competitive thinking is itself the distilled essence of not just competition but innate human existence.
I had to know more about this wondrous tournament, so I decided to look up the ranked thinkers list's issuer, thinkers50, on that invaluable trove of all human wisdom - wikipedia. instead of finding an article for thinkers50, the closest thing I could find was a page for one of its founders, Des Dearlove. unfortunately, this was plastered at the top of the page:
well, that was one strike against the organization's reliability (80 thousand more strikes and they'll be half as bad as the average NBA referee). frantically, desperately, I searched for some sort of reliable source that could vouch for thinkers50. i wanted the creators of ranked competitive thinking to be reliable. I wanted, even needed, that noble contest to be treated with the respect it so deserved.
unfortunately, I could not find a single source that backed it up as an organization run by real humans and not just KPI addicted management robots. there was naught but articles written by previous thinkers50 award winners and uninformative youtube videos. articles that had sentences like "A palpable sense of community pervaded the room, with people deriving pleasure from being together"... ??? get chatgpt to write for you next time...
alas, thinkers50 was a pyramid scheme-esque think thank meant to allow C-suite execs to pat each other on the back while disassociating from the ground truth of what was happening in their company. the ranked competitive thinkers tier list I had admired so completely was unreliable...
however, we CAN'T give up on ranked competitive thinking itself. just because FIFA and UEFA are two of the most dishonest organizations on earth, you wouldn't throw away the beautiful game would you? no. instead we have to relocate it to the true home of the world's most intelligent thinkers - smogoff.
yep - that's right - i'm finally getting to the point that the thread title promised I would be making.
smogoff, help me design the most robust and competitive ranked competitive thinker's tournament in the world.
who do we invite? how do we structure it? how do we judge people? how do contestants compete? how can we use ranked competitive thinking to advance humanity as far as possible (current gameplan: make more microplastics then go to space).
i need your help smogoff - we need to save the game of ranked competitive thinking. I must see all of your ideas!
anyways, I wanted to figure out what the deal was with the stock, so I decided to do things like look at some data and look at the stock's performance over the past year (-93.98% lol). you might hear these things referred to as "due diligence"; most people do them before buying stocks, whereas I do them never. one of the more interesting things I encountered throughout the course of my research was the SEC form 4 disclosures for the stock
for anyone who doesn't know, SEC form 4 filings are basically public disclosures to the US government of insider trades. the
looking through these form 4 filings, I found out that the CEO had bought just under $1 million worth of shares of this garbage stock, and had therefore lost just shy of $100 thousand in 14 days. that's right, 2.66 times the american yearly median income, in just 2 weeks.
impressed by this wallstreetbets-esque feat of stock trading prowess, I decided to look into my newly discovered chief executive officer's background. I felt that it was my duty to figure out which great pedagogues had instructed him, and which great laurels had been placed upon his brow.
also, scott anthony if you're reading this I want you to know that everything I say is in jest. nonchalantly losing 100k is very stupid and honestly kind of sickening, but at the same time your life is probably better than mine in 99% of ways so i'm not in a position to criticize.
my supposition that he would have a linkedin profile was, unsurprisingly, correct. i encountered a fetid swamp of incoherent and valueless business speak
Disruptive change poses existential challenges to leadership teams, raising foundational questions about aspirations, identity, and the very soul of a company. So it is no surprise that leadership teams often struggle to achieve alignment on what degree of growth is needed and what markets and types of innovations to invest in.
RANKED COMPETITIVE THINKING! I had never heard of it before! step aside olympics! this is 500 times more impressive. descartes tells us that "I think, therefore, I am", so surely ranked competitive thinking is itself the distilled essence of not just competition but innate human existence.
I had to know more about this wondrous tournament, so I decided to look up the ranked thinkers list's issuer, thinkers50, on that invaluable trove of all human wisdom - wikipedia. instead of finding an article for thinkers50, the closest thing I could find was a page for one of its founders, Des Dearlove. unfortunately, this was plastered at the top of the page:
well, that was one strike against the organization's reliability (80 thousand more strikes and they'll be half as bad as the average NBA referee). frantically, desperately, I searched for some sort of reliable source that could vouch for thinkers50. i wanted the creators of ranked competitive thinking to be reliable. I wanted, even needed, that noble contest to be treated with the respect it so deserved.
unfortunately, I could not find a single source that backed it up as an organization run by real humans and not just KPI addicted management robots. there was naught but articles written by previous thinkers50 award winners and uninformative youtube videos. articles that had sentences like "A palpable sense of community pervaded the room, with people deriving pleasure from being together"... ??? get chatgpt to write for you next time...
alas, thinkers50 was a pyramid scheme-esque think thank meant to allow C-suite execs to pat each other on the back while disassociating from the ground truth of what was happening in their company. the ranked competitive thinkers tier list I had admired so completely was unreliable...
however, we CAN'T give up on ranked competitive thinking itself. just because FIFA and UEFA are two of the most dishonest organizations on earth, you wouldn't throw away the beautiful game would you? no. instead we have to relocate it to the true home of the world's most intelligent thinkers - smogoff.
yep - that's right - i'm finally getting to the point that the thread title promised I would be making.
smogoff, help me design the most robust and competitive ranked competitive thinker's tournament in the world.
who do we invite? how do we structure it? how do we judge people? how do contestants compete? how can we use ranked competitive thinking to advance humanity as far as possible (current gameplan: make more microplastics then go to space).
i need your help smogoff - we need to save the game of ranked competitive thinking. I must see all of your ideas!
Last edited:
