Para utilizar el chat, inicie sesión.

Another suggestion about "vouching" and banning "trouble makers". resultados de voto

¿Le gusta esta sugerencia?

No

Discusión Another suggestion about "vouching" and banning "trouble makers".

Korben Dallas (5thElement)
Oct 16 2010 at 14:39
posts 11
I would suggest 'warnings' for unsastained attacks on others. If somebody's critics is right, then no problem, but if he criticizes without any reason, then he should get a warning from the thread owner. If such a guy has say 3 warnings, means he is a trouble maker and should be banned from commenting on other people's threads, only his own are OK.

So giving a waring should also be backed and explained and then myfxbook staff decides what to do with it.


Maybe you have other suggestions.

Elkart
Elkart
Oct 16 2010 at 20:05
posts 941
Won't take much for a multiple identity con to go after legitimate analysis. Very slippery slope. Bad idea.

Thomas Bauke (NYdude)
Oct 17 2010 at 04:18
posts 5
Right, Elkart, any other better ideas?

Such a system of banning or allowing chosen people does't have to exist at all. Luckily on this forum there are not many stupid posts, F... words, etc.

But many people complain about those few guys who thrash any possible post and on the other hand they do quite the same things they accuse the other of, like not showing the broker or trading history, doing MaM (they do themselves MaM even thou their systems are crap and losing), etc.

So how to get rid of those who are not cons, but somehow are....


Elkart
Elkart
Oct 17 2010 at 09:22
posts 941
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
Elkart
Oct 17 2010 at 09:34
posts 941
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.

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.

aj901512 (aj901512)
Oct 17 2010 at 09:44
posts 60

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.

Siitari
Oct 17 2010 at 09:45
posts 111
Isn't 'Report' just for this?

Snippet:

You found a post to be insulting? Maybe it looks like spam? Or you just think it shouldn't be there? No problem! Let us know by clicking the 'Report' link beneath the post.

Less effort, better results.
Korben Dallas (5thElement)
Oct 17 2010 at 09:47
posts 11

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
Elkart
Oct 17 2010 at 09:58
posts 941
Nothings perfect hey.

Korban,

If you're not a scam then don't worry about people calling you a scam. You never know where that guy is coming from. He might have a personality disorder or something. Just doesn't matter what people call you. As long as you know better. Readers will decide for themselves, and so life goes...

Just don't get hung up on someones opinion about you. In the end it's the universe that decides. If someone was meant to become a client they will, whether you're called a scam or not by some nut job who can't cope in life. Most of the time the criticism is bout their issues, not yours.

All you do is take the moral high ground, you know you're good, stand your ground and don't get drawn into anything. It's what all the big companies who get criticized often does. And they still get clients...


rfx (ranesh)
Oct 17 2010 at 10:06
posts 257
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 ?

Elkart
Elkart
Oct 17 2010 at 10:13
posts 941
Bit off topic, but it's called lending power to people.

If someone says for example you're and idiot, you can do one of two things. You can believe them or you don't. If you do believe them it means you have given their opinion power and let them affect how you see yourself. This is very important socially as we evaluate ourselves based on the feed back we get from others. So you either go through life thinking you're an idiot, or you end up fighting with people who call you an idiot.

I just shortcut the whole process. I don't give a hoot who thinks what. Just doesn't matter. I know who and what I am, no feed back required, so no fight, thus no lending power to others. If they call me an idiot I take it more as a reflection of their state of mind than of mine. I'm not an idiot and I have friends to prove it, if I was one I'd have no friends. Simple as that.

So you determine who and what people are by what they see you as, my state of being is not up for debate. I might be an idiot in the others persons perspective, but that just tells me how that person views things, so in affect it tells me where that person is at, more than where I'm at.

Moral of story is don't lend power to people, don't let them debate your state of being, if you do that you lend them power. Your power. Especially don't allow that on the anonymous internet.

Aimak Rokalno (Aimak)
Oct 17 2010 at 12:32
posts 149

Elkart posted:
    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.




You are right Elkart. Any form of control or censorship goes against the basic right of free speech.

I voted no here. Pity I can´t change my opinion on my own thread.

exquisite entries with calculated exits
Steve B (stevetrade)
Oct 17 2010 at 13:00
posts 1409

Elkart posted:
    Bit off topic, but it's called lending power to people.

If someone says for example you're and idiot, you can do one of two things. You can believe them or you don't. If you do believe them it means you have given their opinion power and let them affect how you see yourself. This is very important socially as we evaluate ourselves based on the feed back we get from others. So you either go through life thinking you're an idiot, or you end up fighting with people who call you an idiot.

I just shortcut the whole process. I don't give a hoot who thinks what. Just doesn't matter. I know who and what I am, no feed back required, so no fight, thus no lending power to others. If they call me an idiot I take it more as a reflection of their state of mind than of mine. I'm not an idiot and I have friends to prove it, if I was one I'd have no friends. Simple as that.

So you determine who and what people are by what they see you as, my state of being is not up for debate. I might be an idiot in the others persons perspective, but that just tells me how that person views things, so in affect it tells me where that person is at, more than where I'm at.

Moral of story is don't lend power to people, don't let them debate your state of being, if you do that you lend them power. Your power. Especially don't allow that on the anonymous internet.



Spot on Elkart, good post.

11:15, restate my assumptions: 1. Mathematics is the language of nature. 2. Everything around us can be represented and understood through numbers. 3. If you graph these numbers, patterns emerge. Therefore: There are patterns everywhere in nature.
rfx (ranesh)
Oct 17 2010 at 13:25
posts 257

Elkart posted:
    Bit off topic, but it's called lending power to people.

If someone says for example you're and idiot, you can do one of two things. You can believe them or you don't. If you do believe them it means you have given their opinion power and let them affect how you see yourself. This is very important socially as we evaluate ourselves based on the feed back we get from others. So you either go through life thinking you're an idiot, or you end up fighting with people who call you an idiot.

I just shortcut the whole process. I don't give a hoot who thinks what. Just doesn't matter. I know who and what I am, no feed back required, so no fight, thus no lending power to others. If they call me an idiot I take it more as a reflection of their state of mind than of mine. I'm not an idiot and I have friends to prove it, if I was one I'd have no friends. Simple as that.

So you determine who and what people are by what they see you as, my state of being is not up for debate. I might be an idiot in the others persons perspective, but that just tells me how that person views things, so in affect it tells me where that person is at, more than where I'm at.

Moral of story is don't lend power to people, don't let them debate your state of being, if you do that you lend them power. Your power. Especially don't allow that on the anonymous internet.



Yup. I agree with your point of view as well Elkart.

But I still think each of us, individually, having the option of being able to choose to ignore posts and resulting notifications from users we don't want to hear from, will be a useful feature to have. This way, everyone can still have their say on any thread (ie: freedom of speech - constructive or otherwise) and we will also have the freedom to choose whether or not we want to be notified and/or see those posts. So it basically affects 'only' the individual who chooses to use that option to 'ignore'. Everyone else will still be able to see posts made by the ignored user.

If you guys feel this is something worth implementing, we can post it as a new suggestion.

As for this particular thread/suggestion - I have also just voted 'no'. I can't change my vote on the other one though.

Have a great week ahead. 😉

notzero
Oct 17 2010 at 17:23
posts 41
any person should have the ability to block any other person.

for example, if I do not wish to read another user's comments/posts then i should be able to block him.

then, anything that he posts... i will not see it.

but this would not censor out his posts, others that have not censored his posts would still see his posts.

i do realize that i would get blocked by a lot of users, no worries, lol.

the flipside of this issue is that if you block me and you do not read my posts then i am talking to others and you will not be aware of it.

now, if you block me, will you still see the posts where another person that you have not blocked replies to my post and quotes my post that you didnt see in the first place?

anyways, implement a blocking system and you will satisfy the majority of the crowd.

bondage.com has a pretty intense blocking system in their forums, thats a fairly intense crowd, perhaps you could use their system as a model.

now, for the record, grimfd has never liked me personally, and he has dogged on me many times, he has stalked me at the oanda forum and also here.

above, he says that when somebody calls another an idiot that this is more a reflection of who that person is that is doing the idiot calling and that it says little about the person being called an idiot.

btw, i am an idiot, socially, but no worries, lol.

mr elkart/grimfd may very well be a likable kind of person and he may have many friends here in this forum, but never forget that cattle bunch up in herds and likewise so do idiots. no offense intended, of course.

trading is not the same as having a tea party.

i do believe that many of you would do well to come to terms with this issue.

this is a dog eat dog game.

zero/.
<img src=''>

Elkart
Elkart
Oct 17 2010 at 19:49
posts 941
In a private chat or forum, sure, everyone has a right to block, but not a public one.

This forum has an economic agenda and the only people really with a vote is the people who went to the hassle (expense) of creating it.



notzero
Oct 17 2010 at 19:52
posts 41
regarding this thread:

https://www.myfxbook.com/community/trading-systems/vodka/53734,4

i must recognize that mr elkart/grimfd does seem to be a bit handy with his personality, he does seem to get along well with others in the various forums.

but, is this an important part of this game?

i hereby propose that it is a nice attribute, but it is far from being the most important attribute that a trader or fund manager can possess..

notice that in the thread link above that mr elkart and themysteriousone are both running around and sticking out their chest feathers, but where is this mysteriousone now? and why does mr elkart/grimfd not insist that themysteriousone produce some kind of closure to that trading system? the answer, more than likely, is that the system failed. that system was a bidirectional system that trades the eurusd and the eurusd started trending upwards and therefore it is my guess that he failed miserably.

AND, ALSO, I SUGGEST THAT AS THAT ACCOUNT WAS NOT VERIFIED AT ALL, I AM SUGGESTING THAT THE ACCOUNT WAS NOT A LIVE ACCOUNT AS IT WAS REPRESENTED TO BE AND MR ELKART WAS AWARE OF THIS FACT, YET HE SAID NO THING ABOUT IT.

IT IS MY SUGGESTION TO ALL THAT MR ELKART/GRIMFD IS A BIT MORE EAGER TO DELIVER GOOD NEWS THAN IS HE EAGER TO DELIVER BAD NEWS WHEN THERE IS BAD NEWS. THIS IS A DISASTROUS QUALITY FOR A FUND MANAGER TO POSSESS.

DO ANY OF YOU WANT SOMEBODY TO MANAGE EVEN TEN CENTS OF YOUR MONEY AND HE WONT STAND UP TO THE PLATE AND TELL YOU HOW THINGS REALLY ARE? I SOMEHOW THINK NOT.

one of the most important things that a trader and most definitely the most important things that a fund manager can do is to exercise full disclosure.

WHETHER THE NEWS IS GOOD OR BAD, INVESTORS WANT TO KNOW WHAT IS UP.

OR DOWN, SO TO SPEAK.

now, mr elkart, the stage is yours sir.

happy trading,

i am, yours truly, zero the idiot.

<img src=''>

Elkart
Elkart
Oct 17 2010 at 20:12
posts 941
I don't manage funds Zero nor am I interested in having my funds managed.

I don't believe I made one trading related comment in that thread. Need to read stuff Zero. Don't just browse past, or you'll never get it.

Back to you.


notzero
Oct 17 2010 at 22:16
posts 41
notzero
Oct 17 2010 at 22:40
posts 41
speaking of trouble makers...

<b>One trader's account of the Atlanta shooting
Adam G. Leitzes, 08.04.99, 2:00 PM ET

More than most people, day traders use the Internet to stay in contact with one another, trade stories and exchange tips and warnings. So on the evening of the Atlanta shooting last week, I jumped onto the ActiveTrader channel on IRC (Internet Relay Chat), a network founded in 1988 to facilitate real-time communication among Internet users. I knew ActiveTrader would be buzzing with comment from day traders.

I was totally unprepared for what really happened.

The session started predictably with traders, identified only by their online names, chattering about the day's events. Among the comments:

phish: Well at a firm there is always someone in the room making bigger money than you--and lots of people not losing like [the gunman] must have been... gotta be very frustrating

pjj: I'm waiting for the story about the day traders that kept on scalping while the bullets were flying over their heads

But even with several hundred traders talking back and forth, it took only a single statement to quiet the entire virtual room:

Wareal: I was in the All-Tech office during the shooting today

Remember, this was only hours after the shots were fired--and not long after the shooter, Mark Barton, took his own life rather than surrender to police.

Wareal: He took the 2 partners in the office and closed the door

Wareal: > We heard four shots

Wareal: After the four shots we ducked under the desk

Wareal: I did not see him come out of the office

Wareal: I heard fifteen or twenty shots

Wareal: He was shooting people at their terminals

Wareal: Let me say this

Wareal: More than 2/3 of the people in the office were killed or wounded

Wareal: Five of us were in the corner

Wareal: NOT near the exit

Wareal: I think that's what saved us

Wareal: I got up and started to help the wounded

Wareal: Only three people were able to run out

Wareal: And one was killed in the hallway

Wareal: The guy was in the office maybe 5 or 8 minutes before he started shooting

detexb: Wareal, glad your'e ok.

Wareal: Thank you, I am extremely lucky

At the time, these observations met with considerable skepticism. 'Not convinced Wareal is for real,' warned one trader named 'FO.' 'But I hope he's not pulling our legs.'

In subsequent private online and telephone conversations, however, I have learned that Wareal is very much for real. His real name is Chris Brennan, and he is a former manufacturer's rep for a well-known jeans maker. Brennan, 47, was at All-Tech because he had paid $3,000 for a three-week 'boot camp' seminar designed to teach novices how to read Nasdaq Level 2 quots, ride the momentum of stocks and enter and exit positions profitably.

On Thursday afternoon last week, Brennan was in the All-Tech office watching his computer monitor and making simulated paper trades when the person he later learned was Mark Barton walked into the office. Barton took three All-Tech employees, including two partners, into a small office beside the trading floor, shut the door and closed the blinds. Minutes later Brennan and the others heard six gunshots come from the office.

'I thought someone was banging on the filing cabinets,' says Brennan of that instant. 'Except the sounds were more crisp and louder... Who expects to hear gunfire?'

At that point, Barton came out of the office, walking alongside the 25-foot long row of trading desks that seat traders at All-Tech, each trader facing one another across the desk in front of their monitors. 'He opened the door and started blasting people,' recalls Brennan. 'The eighth person in the row on our side of the table was hit badly and may not survive. His reaction may have been only a second or two slower than mine.'

Though the entire front wall of the office is made of glass, Bartons calm, precise shots hit only human flesh; the glass panel remained untouched. '[Barton] only missed one person he fired at, the first person he shot at coming out of the office,' Brennan recalls. 'He fired point blank at the lady (who turned to face him to see the commotion). She felt the round whiz past her forehead and it hit her monitor. She was very lucky.'

Ironically, Brennan may have survived mainly because he was in training and not a full-time trader. Along with other All-Tech students, he was stationed in the corner of the room farthest from any exit. 'Seven of the 11 unharmed were [in the corner],' explains Brennan. 'The other four were able to get out. I've named it the 'Amen Corner.''

Sixty seconds later, with Barton gone and the room filled with dead and wounded, one of Brennan's friends said to him, 'Get your phone, get your phone...' and Brennan called 911, the first such call from the All-Tech office. Authorities logged its time as 3:15 PM.

Afterwards, Brennan says, 'My primary concern was helping the wounded. Survival is a very strong instinct.' Now, several days later, Brennan has returned to All-Tech to help comfort the families of victims and participate in support sessions with his fellow surviving traders and classmates. 'All-Tech has been unbelievable,' notes Brennan, praising the firm's response and deep concern.

As for why he jumped on the Internet the evening of the shooting, Brennan explains that his wife was out of town and, as a regular in the IRC chat room, he went there for the solace of some virtual company.

I asked him whether he planned to continue his training, after what had happened.

Wareal: I'm thinking about it

Wareal: Mark Barton has stolen enough from us

Wareal: But I'm pretty sure I will continue

Wareal: I think it will be the best therapy</b>

<img src=''>




Por favor, inicie sesión para comentar .