Can we call an interfund an interfund vs calling a interfund a allocation?

[MarkB]

Is there a specific topic group here for contribution allocation?

I am new to this site and I really do not understand why TSPtalk defines some of its topic groups as a allocation when it is a interfund transfer:confused:

Contribution Allocations. A contribution allocation specifies the way you want to invest the new money that goes into your TSP account.

Interfund Transfers. An interfund transfer moves the money already in your account among the TSP investment funds. When you make an interfund transfer, you choose the new percent you want invested in each fund.

[SkyPilot]

Don't worry about it... just accept the culture and enjoy it. We all know what we mean, don't we?

[MarkB]

Don't worry about it... just accept the culture and enjoy it. We all know what we mean, don't we?
No doubt that the site is helpful and enjoyed by many.

I posed the question because I did a search for contribution allocation and the result was - a needle in the haystack. My thought was users could benefit if the site called a apple a apple and when you asked for a apple you get apple.
Interfund transfers posts drive the train here at tsptalk and I can understand and accept the comment to accept the culture, I am not here to rock the boat.
Which leads me back to contribution allocations, any thoughts or comments as to why there is not alot of posting on this issue?

[Spaf]

No doubt that the site is helpful and enjoyed by many.

I posed the question because I did a search for contribution allocation and the result was - a needle in the haystack. My thought was users could benefit if the site called a apple a apple and when you asked for a apple you get apple.
Interfund transfers posts drive the train here at tsptalk and I can understand and accept the comment to accept the culture, I am not here to rock the boat.
Which leads me back to contribution allocations, any thoughts or comments as to why there is not alot of posting on this issue?

MHO Contribution allocation (CA) is important, but not as big an issue as IFTs (Taking advantage of the market vs the market taking advantage of U). Some of us use 100% G for a CA. The CA should always bring in the govt matching as a minimum. Some here use TSP solely, some have other investment vehicles, ROTH, mutuals, Internet brokers, etc.

IMHO, terminology used by folks is convoluted into various meanings. Most of the chat on financial sites use words that did not have that meaning years ago. RE: Terms and meanings / general reading > http://www.stockcharts.com/education/MarketAnalysis/dowtheory1.html

SkyPilot was pointing out the fact that it's a cultural thing. With the internet chat, he's fairly well got it nailed!

In fact, as U stay aboard I'm sure you will discover some real interesting words (:rolleyes:)! ........;)

Regards..............:) .............Spaf

[Show-me]

Mark it's kind of like calling it a Kleenex...........instead of a tissue. People use it that way cuz they are comfortable. You can tell what they are meaning in the body of the post. You won't be able to change the herd this size.:D

[FundSurfer]

I'm probably as bad about that as anyone, I'll try to just use IFT.

As to my allocation, I look at that as what I'd put into the market for long term. (My allocation is equal split between CS&I.) My reasoning is that over the long term I expect the market to be moving positive. So if my contributions are going in as my long term stance would be, and the contributions go into my account regularly over a long time period, then my contributions should do a little better split than in the G-fund as some do. I do make regular IFTs (see I can be taught) so my newly contributed funds get swept where I want them fairly regularly anyway.