Won't take much for a multiple identity con to go after legitimate analysis. Very slippery slope. Bad idea.

Free speech. Everyone is entitled to an opinion whether to thread starter likes it or not. If we start censoring stuff were going backwards. North Korea is big on that.

Just comes with the territory. If you put your system out there you're going to get heat, and the best thing to do is then prove you know what you're doing by the dialogue that follows.

Elkart posted:
    Look, I've been told by fxbook to relax a while ago, if someone really irritates you just let fxbook know, if there is enough complaints they'll deal with it, but we can't allow any type of system that interferes with anyone's ability to say what they think, that's the most fundamental underlying principal of successful societies.

Wouldn't help the community to have a small dominant like minded group of people on the forum. Then most other people will bugger off and we'll all sit here showing our systems to ourselves.


Well said, Elkart.

Elkart posted:
    Look, I've been told by fxbook to relax a while ago, if someone really irritates you just let fxbook know, if there is enough complaints they'll deal with it,



I think this is best solution.


I am also against such a system, just wanted to give an alternative to the 'minimum vouches' suggestion that somebody gave in the suggestion box, since it wouldn't work at all. (most people have ZERO vouches, so they cannot place any posts, right? And many guys with 3, 4 vouches think they are kings of myfxbook and can do and say whatever they want, but in fact they know nothing)

So here is the solution for both threads about 'vouching', 'Warnings', etc. So those 2 threads should be closed I think.




The biggest problem is that there are guys telling you what to do, but they do exactly the opposite things, like they tell you to open: broker, history, etc. but they don't show themselves. If anybody has a problem with it, ask myfxbook to disallow it, so everybody must show a broker, if he wants or not, right?


Also the world 'scam' is used freely, but in fact all Experts, all brokers, all traders with systems at the top can be called 'scam' if you really want. There should be some explanation and restriction otherwise everybody will accuse everybody as he pleases.

It's easy to say 'it's/you're a scam' and go away without any consequences. Why don't you back it up with some facts???

Personally I don't really care as I am not going to show any systems or sell anything. I just like myfxbook a lot and am irritated by many stupid posts which don't bring any added value to the thread.
Critics is fine, but constructive critics is much better. Don't you think so?

Elkart posted:

Need to give readers credit as well. They see someone is lashing out or being the self appointed forum police they are very likely to ignore them. Just keep the moral high ground, stay polite and let your figures do the talking.



Yup u're right.. and that's what some of us are doing right now I guess.



<quote=5thElement>

----------- quote by 5thElement---------------------
The biggest problem is that there are guys telling you what to do, but they do exactly the opposite things, like they tell you to open: broker, history, etc. but they don't show themselves. If anybody has a problem with it, ask myfxbook to disallow it, so everybody must show a broker, if he wants or not, right?


Also the world 'scam' is used freely, but in fact all Experts, all brokers, all traders with systems at the top can be called 'scam' if you really want. There should be some explanation and restriction otherwise everybody will accuse everybody as he pleases.

It's easy to say 'it's/you're a scam' and go away without any consequences. Why don't you back it up with some facts???

Personally I don't really care as I am not going to show any systems or sell anything. I just like myfxbook a lot and am irritated by many stupid posts which don't bring any added value to the thread.

Critics is fine, but constructive critics is much better. Don't you think so?


----------------------------end of quote------------------------------

Absolutely.

Maybe a good compromise would be to implement a feature that allows us to ignore anyone we choose to.. so that we do not get email notifications if that person posts on any threads we have participated in nor do we see their posts when we read any threads ? Isn't that a fair compromise ?