A recent question If I'm cash-flow negative, should I dollar-cost-average the money from my bonus over the entire year? was tagged Dollar Cost Averaging, indicating that even though the question had more back-story, essentially it was a flavor of DCA discussion.

An answer proposed using a Buy/Write option strategy, which I questioned via comment and saw a quick reply indicating my error but not offering sufficient counter point. When I offered more details to support my own initial comment, the OP's comment disappeared.

Here I am asking -

  • Does the answer seem appropriate to the question?
  • If so, am I acting as a good member to challenge data that appears lacking or incorrect?
  • I saw no votes to close original question, but on further reflection, wonder whether it's not distinct from any other generic DCA question?
  • 4
    I actually commented to the same responder in a different thread that his/her answers are very hard to understand and strike me personally as more of a academic discussions rather than on-point answers... While the writer is clearly knowledgeable - I just cannot understand what he/she's saying, most of the time...
    – littleadv
    Commented Feb 9, 2014 at 3:00
  • @littleadv - I saw that. For some posters, their English may need a bit of help, and I'm happy to go in and edit needed minor changes. In this case, the whole discussion is actually clear, only I'm not seeing why s/he thinks it's a solution to the question. Commented Feb 9, 2014 at 14:51
  • 3
    The answer is at -3, I think the system works.
    – C. Ross
    Commented Feb 9, 2014 at 18:53

1 Answer 1


Re: @C.Ross's comment "The answer is at -3, I think the system works." Yup!

I'll go further: The answer is now deleted after three deletion votes from high-reputation community members. The system does work.

IMHO, the expert that posted that answer should try to remember, while writing an answer, that the audience for this site is "people who want to be financially literate." (source)

I don't think that precludes discussion of certain advanced strategies that individual investors may be capable of implementing. Yet, I do think an answer shouldn't assume that an OP has the requisite knowledge, comfort level, or risk tolerance for what's proposed. An answer also shouldn't assume that a reader will be able to recognize that a suggested strategy or product could be considered advanced.

  1. Comments on a question can be used to elicit more information from the OP about the knowledge and comfort level, if it isn't evident in the question, profile, or other questions from the OP.

  2. Answers describing advanced strategies should mention, up front, that what's about to be suggested is an advanced strategy or complex product and might not be suitable for investors without the requisite knowledge or risk appetite. I'm not suggesting this as a legal disclaimer, simply as common sense to tell people "here may be dragons."

  • p.s. I recognize the irony that my answer does not fully address your question ;) Commented Feb 10, 2014 at 16:26

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .