So you say:
Poker = gambling.
Experience =! wisdom.
33 years old = young (on a forums populated by people who take ridiculous loan terms because they can't get a credit card, and where a starfish gives "AAA" credit ratings on the basis of his learned questioning).
'k.
I observe poker is a game of chance and there is some skill that can be applied. But I would prefer not to take investment advice from a card player - I consider that a deficient qualification.
I will concur that experience does not necessarily lead to wisdom. It depends on the person. Some people are wise with limited experience.
I happen to be older than 33 (this person) and I object to his characterisation of forum members as "kiddies", elevating himself above others he has no knowledge of.
The credit rating metrics you refer to are a mechanical process as set out in the relevant thread and are based on principles covers by Standard and Poors in their publications on Corporate Credit Ratings. It looks at the financial ability of different issuers to make good their liabilities. I do not need to do that, and someone else could easily have done so. I am not asking anyone to rely on them, and of the 12 requests for information, only 1/3rd have responded. However, you point here is more about discrediting my point of view rather than looking at the credentials of the OP and the advice he is giving. If you wish to debate credit ratings, please do so in the relevant thread.