Trade to Win or Something Else?

[peto]

read the thread,

Where is your evidence? Repeatedly entreating people to 'read the thread', insinuating that hidden within the text we will find some ghastly corruption, doesn't really cut it. Who is this "big dawg" we should worry about? If you cannot move this discussion along with some facts, we must soon reach the conclusion that you are a troll with a persecution complex. and stop 'feeding' you.

 

[trendie]

I have been following this thread with some interest.
( It has the blood-lust of the "Scam Merchants" thread, but with none of the knock-about humour. )

If I can summarize, jimbo has;

no objections that T2W is a commercial venture, merely that some vendors may be given preferential treatment over others, and feels this skews T2Ws impartiality.
Also that the perceived lack of impartiality may be a consequence of commissions T2W may receive from the supposed preferred vendors.

would that cover it, jimbo?

 

[jimbo57]

.

 

[jimbo57]

.

 

[snowball9]

I have not implied 'ghastly corruption' . Is that the royal 'we' peto or are you speaking for many?

Jimbo,

I agree with your comments all the way! I have noticed that if you speak the truth on this forum you end up making many enemies.

S9

 

[SOCRATES]

read the thread, I have many other causes too, but none that are relevant these five minutes. I think there are serious issues raised here, if you don't, or you find them too difficult, then I am sorry, don't bother commenting.

This is not about making friends, that is not the nature of this business

At last, through your fog of persistent pedantry you are finally getting a glimmer of reality.

All of this is not about sharing ~ it is about competing ~ and competing ferociously, each one according to his ability and means.

It is not about clubbing together it is about survival of the fittest, the modern equivalent of gladiatorial combat.

Efficient, knowledgeable, capable, battle hardened traders welcome the challenge, even suffer withdrawal symptoms on non trading days in anticipation of a resumtion of "the games".

Numpties resent the cruelty of an uncaring competitive environment. They try to somehow vainly manipulate the idea of sharing, of protection of beginners, complaining....about advertising....and all sorts of irrelevancies....implying dark conspiracies exist and other nonsenses.

 

[Kentucky Shrub]

I have a dream . Whats that? To Have a dream !!

I don't think this would work, some folks on here already seem to have multiple accounts. It could get out of hand!

Well, Yes but in order to be eligible to vote then you need to have say a 50 post contribution from yourself,

You could spread it onto a post option too, if there was an offensive post then perhaps that would need 10/15 members to click remove post option.

You would have a more balanced jury of moderation, the consensus of grouped balanced judgement .

think about it its more interaction also for the members, and this is good.

I believe its THE way to moderate, the members themselves contribute further by policing their own environment.

That ties in very well with online community doesnt it? the members of that community get to have a greater say over whats good for their community.

there would be none of this "hey jack sloppy moderation there" "oh yeah you think so buddy how would like a mouth full of teeth?" No, none, jack , buddy and more members have the freedom, the choice to have their say, resulting in a fairer moderation policy of content.

This again will increase harmony and better online relationships between the likes of Jack & Buddy. in short it will be creating

A Better World In Which to Live. isnt that our purpose as humans?

 

[jimbo57]

.

 

[SOCRATES]

I think that is part of it, I also think it can be extended to multiple nicks being used by some and ignored by mods, poss for the same reason.

If you want a short summary...T2W started out as a forum to help traders to win through sharing experiences, knowledge etc. At some tipping point, as membership increased, the commercial side of the site, revenue generation through various means, has taken over to the detriment of the content and its purpose. So it no longer I think is motivated by its initial aims.

And I have not finished with you Jimbo, by any means.

In my post above I explain how all of this is about competing and not about sharing.

You obviously do not like it.

I love competing. I enjoy winning. I also recognise that in order for some of us to win, and win consistently there have to be casualties. The market needs cannon fodder, plenty of it, in order to maintain liquidity. This is a fact of life.

You think the opposite....you think all of this should be shared.

This goes against the very principles of how markets exist and operate.

You are miffed because you percieve that the appearance of commercial interests who advertise are apt to spoil your interest, which is the hope the sharing will continue in ever ascending levels so you can personally benefit, obviously.

The hard facts are that, yes, in a public website such as this there is sharing, but only to a certain level, and then only what is mainstream, but no further.

 

[SOCRATES]

As ever your hobby horse. That is not what this thread is about.

It is not a hobby horse, It is a holistic view I have you have not got.

Whereas your view is a blinkered one, mine is a multidimensional one.

That is your fault, not mine.

 

[peto]

I have not implied 'ghastly corruption' . Is that the royal 'we' peto or are you speaking for many?

Arise, Sir Jimbo. We suspect we were speaking for many of our loyal subjects. :cheesy:

I think that is part of it, I also think it can be extended to multiple nicks being used by some and ignored by mods, poss for the same reason.

If you want a short summary...T2W started out as a forum to help traders to win through sharing experiences, knowledge etc. At some tipping point, as membership increased, the commercial side of the site, revenue generation through various means, has taken over to the detriment of the content and its purpose. So it no longer I think is motivated by its initial aims.

Thanks for the summary. I think revenue generation is an inevitable requirement to provide all the band-width and technology and provide an income for Sharkey and his team. Where I differ with you is that I fail to see where this is "to the detriment of the content and its purpose" of the forums at any rate. I appreciate that a potential conflict could exist, but I see no evidence of it. With regard to multiple nicks, I imagine they can be hard to spot, but where the mods have the evidence they seem to crack down quickly enough, very firmly in fact.

 

[Splitlink]

I have not implied 'ghastly corruption' . Is that the royal 'we' peto or are you speaking for many?

When you used the word "kickbacks" you were implying corruption, in my view, ghastly, or not.

A person who has a business employing over 40 people should have a good idea of what he was trying to achieve when he used that word in his argument. Kickback instead of commission. I have a smaller business, but I know the difference.

Split

 

[SOCRATES]

Thanks for the summary. I think revenue generation is an inevitable requirement to provide all the band-width and technology and provide an income for Sharkey and his team. Where I differ with you is that I fail to see where this is "to the detriment of the content and its purpose" of the forums at any rate. I appreciate that a potential conflict could exist, but I see no evidence of it. With regard to multiple nicks, I imagine they can be hard to spot, but where the mods have the evidence they seem to crack down quickly enough, very firmly in fact.

I agree with you completely.

In the matter of multiple nicks....they are not difficult to spot because of simililarity in use of phrasing, punctuation, emphasis, etc., when you look carefully enough instead of just seeing and reading.

 

[Kentucky Shrub]

"In my post above I explain how all of this is about competing and not about sharing."

I have a conflict, a niggle an idea that I cannot answer because of ignorance, I see it as o.k. to help, share well its human , but i do not know the dynamics of helping Public to compete against corporates?

I have tried to find figures on who pays who, numbers ie. 90% of public pay the corporates?, in which case then It doesnt make sense to share, but if the figures where 10-20 % of public and 70% other corparates pay the 10% big players, then i think theres room to help small public players. In some extended way is there?

But I do not or have not found any info regarding this.

Its been said the markets need the fodder lots of it so is it mainly Joe public all of them that pay the big players? Are there any stats anywhere? surely it has to be mainly big players & institutions taking money off of other big players and institutions investment banks etc.?

but i dont know.

 

[SOCRATES]

When you used the word "kickbacks" you were implying corruption, in my view, ghastly, or not.

A person who has a business employing over 40 people should have a good idea of what he was trying to achieve when he used that word in his argument. Kickback instead of commission. I have a smaller business, but I know the difference.

Split

I have spotted the typo "who" followed by "who".

It gives me the impression that what you originally meant was "A person who purports to have a business".

This would be more in line with your reasoning, I would presuppose....

This is because a person who would own such an enterprise would not lower himself to engage in trivia with regard to advertising by others and other irrelevant nonsense, just for the malicious thrill of stirring controversy and disharmony, I respectfully submit.

An individual who is proficient at his profession does not concern himself with irrelevant trivia and makes a nuisance of himself levelling accusations at the owners of a site of which he is a member, especially when he is not asked to contribute towards the running costs of providing such a useful resource for people interested in this topic, I again respectully submit, because to engage in such a persistent campaign, is not only boring and tedious, but very bad manners.

 

[Splitlink]

I have spotted the typo "who" followed by "who".

It gives me the impression that what you originally meant was "A person who purports to have a business".

This would be more in line with your reasoning, I would presuppose....

This is because a person who would own such an enterprise would not lower himself to engage in trivia with regard to advertising by others and other irrelevant nonsense, just for the malicious thrill of stirring controversy and disharmony, I respectfully submit.

An individual who is proficient at his profession does not concern himself with irrelevant trivia and makes a nuisance of himself levelling accusations at the owners of a site of which he is a member, especially when he is not asked to contribute towards the running costs of providing such a useful resource for people interested in this topic, I again respectully submit, because to engage in such a persistent campaign, is not only boring and tedious, but very bad manners.

I didn't, quite, like to express myself in the way you describe. It suggests disbelief in what the poster wrote

Split

 

[Kentucky Shrub]

If people should not be helped, then surley assisted dis-information is a very valid tool to use , especially on public boards.

 

[SOCRATES]

I didn't, quite, like to express myself in the way you describe. It suggests disbelief in what the poster wrote

Split

What the poster wrote to me is not wholly credible.

It is not wholly credible to me because it implies the poster is not a truly battle hardened really experienced market professional.

Really truly battle hardened experienced market professionals do not concern themselves with irrelevant trivia. They just focus on the main event, selfish, but true.

They are too busy trading and being successful at what they do to engage in crusades to create controversy and argument over irrelevancies, and additionally to be rude and hostile to their hosts.

In fact, they are inclined to do the opposite.

And what happens is that when they do make statements as a consequence of long experience and deep knowledge of the topic under discussion, it is the NUMPTIES who see fit to contradict, when in fact they should be doing their best to gain by learning instead of arguing pointlessly.

I have observed this repeatedly on this site, and how it is that threads are derailed when the clowns appear and interrupt interesting, meaningful and constructive discussions taking place above their levels of understanding and acceptance, as a consequence partly of ego and mainly as a lack of trading maturity.

 

[jimbo57]

.

 

[SOCRATES]

well that is quite ironic from you socco, the ulimate de-railer of threads on these boards.

Peto/Split- you should both wake up - he called me a liar two days ago, but the posts were taken down, and now chosses to re-iterate this, admittedly more couched, whilst Sunday moderation is in force.

Consider this. The way this thread has developed, and the actions it has led to, just mirror the way a near totalitarian state very close to home operates

It professes democracy, it professes equality, but if attacked it first offers denial and lies.

If the attack continues it offers explanation. If the attack continues it culls who it believes to be the ones providing fuel (often culling indiscriminately because for all its control, it really doesn't know who to target), and if the attack then continues it uses its friends to try to discredit anyone left standing and daring to question its righteousness. This is where we are now.

Don't be impertinent to me, Jimbo. I do not derail anything.

If the truth be known, everytime I attempt to elevate a discussion it gets flattened by clowns who suddenly appear to disrupt anything worhwhile, to the dismay and annoyance of other knowledeable and experienced members.

If you can't keep up, then shut up.