by Johnny1and1 » Fri Aug 05, 2022 2:18 pm
Street talk = Trust but verify. I trust what I hear, but don't share everything, and understand why people would be leery. Verify is incredibly difficult unless you're close. I have been, and still am in a couple of instances. A small sample size, and a very narrow scope overall. And I understand things vary from crew to crew, famiglia to famiglia, and region to region. Frankly even day to day, hour by hour and everything is extremely situationally.
Inducted member - If it is first hand, and there is a long term relationship with proven results.
Inducted member turned rat - Trust but verify, and understand they say anything the Feds want to hear. Testimony is largely and generally true, But even there we have significant instances of outright disinformation. To the point the Feds essentially fired one where I was very familiar with the situation. The You Tube guys are a joke. I've watched maybe 10 minutes total of these in my lifetime. I'm just not that interested, and I know they're full of shit and exaggerate
Feds - Understand that to get an indictment is easy. Understand they don't need to be perfect with information, they only need information to get a conviction. Indictment and conviction information is very good, but not perfect, and sometimes wildly off about details and matters that aren't germane, but details and matters in which people on this site might, and probably are, interested in.
Media - I somewhat trust the one gentleman on this site becuase he has first hand experience with some of the same poeple I do. The history he writes though I have no idea about, and no interest in. But the people he has met that I have met I have no reason to doubt him, and at this point, his discretion. After that, media is not to be trusted in any matter, especially those which might impact my net worth, and standard of living. Trust but verify.
Posters on this board that are researchers - Hard to argue with empirical data and most evidence, unless they are relying on something mentioned above. The same doesn't hold true for some of their conclusion and speculation. A good researcher does not equal a personal able to make accurate assumptions. The good ones preface their assumptions, and I have respect for that.
Posters on this board that post street stuff - There are two, maybe three on here that I would assume are somewhat close based on their posts. Again, a very narrow scope becuase I only know when they post about something I know about. Other subjects I'm making an assumption based on previous accurate posts, tat I know to be accurate. I haven't been on here long, but two posters I went back and researched past posts over a period of years, with key word searches related to topics I know about, and they are pretty spot on. They also never post active stuff, or if they do, they generalize, which I understand. This actually made me a bit uncomfortable.
A combination of all of the above, each factor weighed differently for different people, is probably a fairly accurate picture. It depends on what you're looking for. History? There are some pretty decent researchers on here. Current inside baseball that's probably very accurate, but largely unknown and unverifiable? That universe is pretty narrow on this board, and everywhere. So in may case I read the street stuff, things I believe and things I don't. I weight that more heavily becuase I have some experience. Again, narrow in scope. I have no interest in 50 years ago, and I have no interest in some of the speculation about details, becuase I lives some details, and those are the only details I know factually, and I understand they are different depending on group, geography, earning ability etc. I know factually an associate that earns has more respect given than a dead beat made guy.
It's like running a business. You develop relationships that are long term, based on trust, and developed over long periods of time. Not 18 months.
That's my take, and the reasons why I read what I do, and how I value some poster's content above others. It is also a personal thing in that I don't spend time on topics that don't interest me, or could directly impact me. Even though at this point it shouldn't make any differences, but old habits die very hard. And I'd not do anything to jeopardize current relationships where I can say I like the people, and consider them my friends. It's a different category of friends, and you learn to compartmentalize.
Street talk = Trust but verify. I trust what I hear, but don't share everything, and understand why people would be leery. Verify is incredibly difficult unless you're close. I have been, and still am in a couple of instances. A small sample size, and a very narrow scope overall. And I understand things vary from crew to crew, famiglia to famiglia, and region to region. Frankly even day to day, hour by hour and everything is extremely situationally.
Inducted member - If it is first hand, and there is a long term relationship with proven results.
Inducted member turned rat - Trust but verify, and understand they say anything the Feds want to hear. Testimony is largely and generally true, But even there we have significant instances of outright disinformation. To the point the Feds essentially fired one where I was very familiar with the situation. The You Tube guys are a joke. I've watched maybe 10 minutes total of these in my lifetime. I'm just not that interested, and I know they're full of shit and exaggerate
Feds - Understand that to get an indictment is easy. Understand they don't need to be perfect with information, they only need information to get a conviction. Indictment and conviction information is very good, but not perfect, and sometimes wildly off about details and matters that aren't germane, but details and matters in which people on this site might, and probably are, interested in.
Media - I somewhat trust the one gentleman on this site becuase he has first hand experience with some of the same poeple I do. The history he writes though I have no idea about, and no interest in. But the people he has met that I have met I have no reason to doubt him, and at this point, his discretion. After that, media is not to be trusted in any matter, especially those which might impact my net worth, and standard of living. Trust but verify.
Posters on this board that are researchers - Hard to argue with empirical data and most evidence, unless they are relying on something mentioned above. The same doesn't hold true for some of their conclusion and speculation. A good researcher does not equal a personal able to make accurate assumptions. The good ones preface their assumptions, and I have respect for that.
Posters on this board that post street stuff - There are two, maybe three on here that I would assume are somewhat close based on their posts. Again, a very narrow scope becuase I only know when they post about something I know about. Other subjects I'm making an assumption based on previous accurate posts, tat I know to be accurate. I haven't been on here long, but two posters I went back and researched past posts over a period of years, with key word searches related to topics I know about, and they are pretty spot on. They also never post active stuff, or if they do, they generalize, which I understand. This actually made me a bit uncomfortable.
A combination of all of the above, each factor weighed differently for different people, is probably a fairly accurate picture. It depends on what you're looking for. History? There are some pretty decent researchers on here. Current inside baseball that's probably very accurate, but largely unknown and unverifiable? That universe is pretty narrow on this board, and everywhere. So in may case I read the street stuff, things I believe and things I don't. I weight that more heavily becuase I have some experience. Again, narrow in scope. I have no interest in 50 years ago, and I have no interest in some of the speculation about details, becuase I lives some details, and those are the only details I know factually, and I understand they are different depending on group, geography, earning ability etc. I know factually an associate that earns has more respect given than a dead beat made guy.
It's like running a business. You develop relationships that are long term, based on trust, and developed over long periods of time. Not 18 months.
That's my take, and the reasons why I read what I do, and how I value some poster's content above others. It is also a personal thing in that I don't spend time on topics that don't interest me, or could directly impact me. Even though at this point it shouldn't make any differences, but old habits die very hard. And I'd not do anything to jeopardize current relationships where I can say I like the people, and consider them my friends. It's a different category of friends, and you learn to compartmentalize.