Trade to Win or Something Else?

[dbphoenix]

This isn't a matter of member protection, it's one of sheer overwhelming quantity. The people who post them are paragons of persistence. Within days you wouldn't see a post about trading in any of the forums without scrolling down seven pages. The front page would be underwater as a matter of course. I'm not joking.

If the poster has a vendor tag, then apply whatever rules you have for vendors. If he doesn't have one, give him one. In any case, the moderator needn't concern himself with being referee.

 

[rols]

If the poster has a vendor tag, then apply whatever rules you have for vendors. If he doesn't have one, give him one. In any case, the moderator needn't concern himself with being referee.

I'm afraid we're all missing the point here. At least from my perception. I think the carte blanche introduction of VENDORS will taint and corrupt the equilibrium of the site.

Basically they are all over these boards like a bad dose of herpes and I for one am troubled that the same names are popping up on every thread, sometimes transparently appearing for the sake of self promotion rather than any genuine desire to contribute to the discussion in hand.

IMO this wil bring a detrimental and lasting blight to the very heart of T2W.

 

[snowball9]

ooooooooooy

What do you mean by "henhouse" or are you impying this website is some sort of chicken run of your imagination?

As usual you get the wrong end of the stick.

It does not matter how many vendors there are or what they vend.

What matters is that this is a valuable resource of reference for those who need it.

Those who do not need information do not need it and those who need it despearately do.

Furhtermore the market is not a kindergarten. It is not a suitable environment for children.

It is only suitable for grown ups, real grown ups, and then, not every grown up is suited to it.

So let us stop this nannying once and for all. Tedious and boring this is getting...

Hi Soc,

I have been reading this thread for a little while and i find it a bit amusing at the way these humans behave. Can you tell me:

1. How many members do you have here?

2. How many of them would you say are like kids?or in % terms.

3. How many are real traders in % terms.?

4. How may are paper trading % terms?

5. Would you reccommend this forum to a friend?

 

[dbphoenix]

I'm afraid we're all missing the point here. At least from my perception. I think the carte blanche introduction of VENDORS will taint and corrupt the equilibrium of the site.

Basically they are all over these boards like a bad dose of herpes and I for one am troubled that the same names are popping up on every thread, sometimes transparently appearing for the sake of self promotion rather than any genuine desire to contribute to the discussion in hand.

IMO this wil bring a detrimental and lasting blight to the very heart of T2W.

I don't disagree. However, a year ago the problem was that there were a number of "undeclared" vendors prowling the boards like pedophiles outside the schoolyard fence. And that was well before we hit 60K members.

This is a very popular site. Perhaps the most popular. And there are a lot of beginners. What more can a vendor ask? But to eliminate everyone who provides services, who coaches, who has a website or newsletter, etc, would turn T2W into a beginners-only site. And to pre-qualify any experienced trader who isn't a philanthropist would not only impose an impossible burden on the admins but make them vulnerable to legal liabilities.

The experienced traders can expose the charlatans fairly quickly and easily. And if the "vendor" isn't prepared to deal with that, let him go elsewhere.

Db

 

[jimbo57]

.

 

[barjon]

...........................Let’s begin by looking at a few posts in the last day or so:

Sharky: 6.10pm Friday: …”but please don't imply that there is anything underhand going on between T2W and any vendors because this is a complete lie”.

Well, technically correct, but there are Vendors on this site, aside from the upfront advertisers, that do pay T2W commissions (kickbacks) on a continued basis. As I have said before, I do not regard kickbacks as underhand, but if there is an ongoing relationship between a Vendor, named or otherwise, and the Site, it should be declared. So Sharky, its not a ‘complete lie’

Why should it be declared? Simply because if it isn’t, then the site becomes no more than cannons for the fodder of newbies. If you doubt this, look at the correlation between the acceleration in advertising on the site and the increase in ‘members’.

Sharky: 6.10pm Friday (again):…” there comes a point when it becomes abusive, and I don't see why I or the mods should suffer it any more than any other member of this site.”

Abusive? I don’t think there is anything here abusive, however as I pointed out in previous posts with regards to kickback – they are only generally taken as xxxx by those that have a reason to believe this to be the case. So nothing abusive issued, and clearly no abuse meant, but equally clearly some taken. Nu Labour bells ring in my ears – only the guilty feel guilty Sharky, the innocent have nothing to defend...........................

jimbo

Aside from correcting one or two facts I have kept clear of this "debate" because I don't really think you want to discuss anything constructively at all. The tenor and language of your posts suggest that you are merely engaging in an attempt to blacken T2W's integrity and to search for selective examples to that end. Far from a "search for the truth" it seems to me.

Take "kickbacks" for example. However much you choose to bend the interpretation it is understood by most people to imply something underhand. You need look no further than the dictionary definition:

kickback - part of a sum received paid to another by confidential agreement for favours past or to come

Sharky has explained the nature of commissions paid by advertisers which are normal commercial practice. Of course it is insulting to keep saying that these are "kickbacks" in the generally accepted meaning of the term and to maintain such a stance is mischievous at best.

Sharky also went on to explain ".....However forums are completely separate, we don't make any money off anybody posting anything in the forum - apart from allowing sponsors to post ocassionally in the T2W Sponsor Announcement forum or if one of the T2W team posts a store announcements, Traders Library promotion or something like the T2W Global Trader Competition. We only make money on banner ads, partner emails and advertising in the newsletter. Even the money we make from features like the survey and awards goes back into paying for the prizes and any costs like shipping incurred.

Vendors as designated on the forums have never and will never recieve any 'kickback', 'commission' or other]wise from us - from anything they've ever posted on there...." and yet again you twist that to give the impression that he has accepted that there are "kickbacks" from vendors per se.

Similarly with your implications that posts on this thread have been deleted just because T2W team and mods don't happen to like them and/or were embarrassing to T2W. Tut. tut.

It's a pity that you seem hell bent on destruction rather than construction since several of the points you have raised are important ones to consider in rational discussion. Still so be it, I've probably wasted my time replying.

Cheers

jon

 

[jimbo57]

.

 

[dbphoenix]

Why should it be declared? Simply because if it isn’t, then the site becomes no more than cannons for the fodder of newbies. If you doubt this, look at the correlation between the acceleration in advertising on the site and the increase in ‘members’.

Perhaps you could explain what difference, in your opinion, such a declaration would make with regard to protecting the new. I suggest that anyone who believes that any free trading site exists for the exchange of information among experienced traders is being at least a bit naive. Surely no one over the age of, say, ten believes that anyone has his best interests at heart other than, perhaps, his mother, and sometimes not even then.

In other words, why should I care if oily advertisers are stuffing envelopes of money into a hollow tree somewhere for subsequent retrieval by shadowy figures in the employ of some website developer or other? If I'm too greedy, lazy, stupid to know any better than to open up my wallet to anyone who asks, how is that anyone's problem other than my own?

Just wondering.

Db

 

[peto]

Well, technically correct, but there are Vendors on this site, aside from the upfront advertisers, that do pay T2W commissions (kickbacks) on a continued basis.

What is your evidence for this? Why would they pay if they are not advertising?

Why should it be declared? Simply because if it isn’t, then the site becomes no more than cannons for the fodder of newbies

.Newbies must know that the up-front adverts are paid for. What sort of trap do you visualise newbies falling into as a consequence of your Vendors paying comms without advertising?

If you doubt this, look at the correlation between the acceleration in advertising on the site and the increase in ‘members’.

I should have thought that was a natural relationship.

Abusive? I don’t think there is anything here abusive

Your quotes: "This is not acceptable - pure and simple, and typifies the heavy handed, thoughtless and provocative approach adopted here."
"I also know how the 'broker'/client relationship works, so I don't need the lecture thanks.. "(this after asking for specific details of the advertising arrangements and receiving a full and detailed answer!)
"moderators' today (now there is a misnomer)".........

however as I pointed out in previous posts with regards to kickback – they are only generally taken as xxxx by those that have a reason to believe this to be the case . So nothing abusive issued

.You clearly " believe this to be the case ", at least when they are undeclared.

Frugi: 8.00 pm yesterday: “This isn't a matter of member protection…The front page would be underwater as a matter of course. I'm barely exaggerating either”

Hmm! I doubt it,

A 30 second search for an unmoderated forum found http://mwr.hyperboards.com/index.php?action=view_topic&topic_id=38&start=16 as my first result. I have seen many similar. Certain death of a forum.

 

[jimbo57]

.

 

[wasp]

What would be your alternate solution Jimbo57?

Bearing in mind it would probably become a pay site and greatly reduce new and experienced members without advertising, and also the childish mess it becomes akin peto's link he posted.

 

[jimbo57]

.

 

[jimbo57]

.

 

[barjon]

I am not twisting anything jon, and I have no beef with you particularly, I am just attempting to make sure that T2W can again be a decent open and honest site, that newbies are not led through the 'click through' forest, and that moderation is again impartial without financial motivation to propel it.

Jimbo

fwiw if I felt T2w was not a decent, open and honest site with impartial (by intention) moderation I would not spend so much of my time (unpaid) on it. It may be worth repeating what I said in an earlier post:

mmm, well all I can say as a volunteer moderator is that I have never, but never, been asked to show favouritism in any shape or form. If I have been too harsh or too soft that's been down to me and me alone. I can see you raising your eyebrows, but all I can do is state the fact.

That's not to say I dont make mistakes or get things wrong. And I may do things that appear to have an ulterior motive when they don't (bit like me wondering whether there's anything behind an innocent post )

cheers

jon

 

[dbphoenix]

And why should you care? Of course its your choice, but you clearly have experience, and perhaps expertise, do you take a pleasure in seeing newbies chopped up by Marv (salty) etc or by the latest click through ad from some ****e system saying make $500/day, or do you think "these are people that have potential"? Of course the choice is yours.

I don't take pleasure in it. But neither do I let it keep me up at night. If vendors/advertisers are perpetrating fraud, those experienced traders who know how to spot it aren't shy about saying so, and if the moderators would stop deleting posts other than for very specific reasons that require no interpretation, the "Marvs" of the world would not be able to gain any traction.

As I said in an earlier post, everyone -- beginners and experienced traders alike -- should assume that all "vendors" are advertisers. Otherwise, what is the point of pinning on the tag? And if someone is advertising without the vendor tag, then members should raise the alarm. Any beginner who then insists on writing checks has no one to blame for the consequences but himself.

Db

 

[jimbo57]

.

 

[wasp]

Why would it become a pay site (although that is a possibility)? It wasn't before when it was a lot more open and cleaner. Think about that. Why does it carry a plethora of advertising (bith open and tacit) now? And why have th 'clicks' (aka members, ramped) Think about that too.

Is that trade to win, or is that a click through site?

I've never paid much mind to the levels of advertising and likewise never do so on the tele or magazines or newspapers either. IMO if you are going to buy something due to a big flashing banner or one persons comments more fool you. (Be it your suggestion or MarvinS (for exampe). Due diligance is required in EVERYTHING in life and before replying to you, I have a read through most of you posts on this site and I'm pretty sure you are a very experienced trader with no ulterior motives. Not completely neccessary but diligance is always advisable.

Even if T2W do moderate on a bias of vendors to benefit themselves, which I incidentally don't think they do, surely everyone is responsible for their own actions as well, and if they go through with an account with worldspreads, then they deserve all they get as they should have had the intelligence to read the whole thread and get an overall opinion of the company, not just take Marvins word for it.

As I said, I don't believe moderation is done in a way to benefit vendors, but as you do, what do you suggest as an alternative then?

 

[barjon]

as I said jon, I have no beef with you

jimbo

glad of that - perhaps you'll give credence to what i've said and reflect on it then

cheers

jon

 

[jimbo57]

[.

 

[wasp]

Nice wasp- I already have you down as the margaret beckett of this particular forum (joke btw before you get offended and buzz off somewhere else)

It's not a question of believing anything, its a question, as is trading, of looking at the evidence in front of your eyes. Taking that evidence, dissecting it, and understanding it. I have given you an alternative in my above post, but clearly you missed it.

We are where we are for the reasons I have laid out, and we can go back (unlike nu Lab and Dubya in Iraq for example), but it takes a bold decision, and perhaps more than that - you see what I mean yet?

Like trading, everyone looks at the evidence, dissects it, understands it and comes to their own opinion...

Now if you'll excuse me, there is a big advert in my local paper for an opportunity to join a mailing list whereas all I need do is send a fiver to ten other people and then they'll do the same and all send me a fiver and apparantly, it just goes on and on until I'm rich... :cheesy: