Originally Posted by
SightseeMC
I'm trying to understand this passive-aggressive response. The person you quoted literally says there is a theory (true) that he/she doesn't agree with (clear and respectable response), but that if you find a good place and book now you are fine (also true).
While he may be subjective, he doesn't denigrate the detached-certificate arbitrage theory. He states a reason why it is highly unlikely given Marriott's prior behavior.
I keep seeing people post responses in this thread where they seem to have some amount of self-worth attached to how this plays out, aside from the value of certs themselves. On 8/19 this may be the most "SUCK ON THAT!" thread in the last year on FT, since so many people seem like they're just waiting to lord it over anybody who guesses/bets are "wrong."
Take it at face value, let’s have an objective discussion that can benefit people trying to make decisions.
The poster asked a question and got a condescending response (to the poster and inaccurately generalizing other posters’ guidance) without answering the question (what he should do).
Continuing to reference past prescedent, in the which the current situation will not have an instrument available anymore to revert to, as the rationalization for prediction isn’t accurate nor objective.
I don’t see this turning into an “I told you so”, rather a collective licking of wounds or rejoicing depending how it goes. I’ve been trying to poke some of the extreme opinions to state their prediction in this specific instance, as a means to temper it down for others reading. After seeing how this has been going, I’m going to try and do my part stop participating in the pissing contest.