The Hidden Secret Agenda

[SOCRATES]

Is that before or after the 100k margin call?

Wrong answer, try again.

 

[the blades]

Wrong answer, try again.

Eyup Soc,

as everyting is known in advance, will you tell me when Zupcon is going to provide the information you require, so that I can log back in at the required time?

UTB

Edit - as everything is known in advance, Why do you need Zupcon to provide anything at all?

 

[zupcon]

The part of the rule book that deals with the rules of CONDUCT.

You posted this to CYOF without anyone asking you. You volunteered the information and repeated it and defended it several times..

Yet...when you are asked...you are bizzi...or Tinky Winky....or having a cup of tea..
It is not me who does not understand izzit ?

It is you who understands very well...now let's see...

Becuase without you complying to this request this thread is stuck...

Now we are waiting...I am verri patient...but the mob is not...so it is all up to you.. ...can we now have the section on CONDUCT on which you are an EXPERT....posted without further delay please...

If thats a concise response, Id hate to see what passes for verbose

The rules are comprised of 13 sections, unfortunately non of these relate specifically to "conduct" However for your information the sections relate to the following topics:

1. Multiple Accounts
2. Unacceptable Content
3. Copyrighted or Trademarked Materials
4. Advertising
5. Vendors
6. Piracy and Unlawful Activites (N.B spelling mistake)
7. Posting Guidelines
8. Managing User Content
9. Mentioning other Web sites
10. Signature Rules
11. Moderators
12. User Names
13. Violations of these Rules

Now as frugi as kindly posted a link, is there any need for me to post specific sections ?, would you like perhaps a list of your violations ?, of CYOF's violations, or Bulldozers violations ?

Now tell me what you want what you really really want, and I'll try to assist ye

your humble servant
zu

 

[the blades]

If thats a concise response, Id hate to see what passes for verbose

The rules are comprised of 13 sections, unfortunately non of these relate specifically to "conduct" However for your information the sections relate to the following topics:

1. Multiple Accounts
2. Unacceptable Content
3. Copyrighted or Trademarked Materials
4. Advertising
5. Vendors
6. Piracy and Unlawful Activites (N.B spelling mistake)
7. Posting Guidelines
8. Managing User Content
9. Mentioning other Web sites
10. Signature Rules
11. Moderators
12. User Names
13. Violations of these Rules

Now as frugi as kindly posted a link, is there any need for me to post specific sections ?, would you like perhaps a list of your violations ?, of CYOF's violations, or Bulldozers violations ?

Now tell me what you want what you really really want, and I'll try to assist ye

your humble servant
zu

bloody hell, that was quick!

UTB

 

[SOCRATES]

There seems no huge need to quote the 'rule book' here since it is available to all in the FAQ.

http://www.trade2win.com/boards/faq.php?faq=faq_site_guidelines#faq_item_site_guidelines

There are the sections in question (I think):
http://www.trade2win.com/boards/showpost.php?p=303315&postcount=412

Might this help nudge the needle onto the next track?

Frugi, you don't gettit either.

 

[SOCRATES]

Eyup Soc,

as everyting is known in advance, will you tell me when Zupcon is going to provide the information you require, so that I can log back in at the required time?

UTB

Edit - as everything is known in advance, Why do you need Zupcon to provide anything at all?

Yes, but don't take your eye off the ball.

And, yes, we need Zupccon to provide a replica and not wot frugi mentions.

 

[SOCRATES]

If thats a concise response, Id hate to see what passes for verbose

The rules are comprised of 13 sections, unfortunately non of these relate specifically to "conduct" However for your information the sections relate to the following topics:

1. Multiple Accounts
2. Unacceptable Content
3. Copyrighted or Trademarked Materials
4. Advertising
5. Vendors
6. Piracy and Unlawful Activites (N.B spelling mistake)
7. Posting Guidelines
8. Managing User Content
9. Mentioning other Web sites
10. Signature Rules
11. Moderators
12. User Names
13. Violations of these Rules

Now as frugi as kindly posted a link, is there any need for me to post specific sections ?, would you like perhaps a list of your violations ?, of CYOF's violations, or Bulldozers violations ?

Now tell me what you want what you really really want, and I'll try to assist ye

your humble servant
zu

It is not what I want. It is what is required...

What is required is for you to post the rules as you first posted them as they applied to CYOF.

I would like you to post the rules as relevant according to your frame of reference according to what you call my violations, CYOF's violations and Bulldozer's violations.

I will be adding more to this later...

 

[SOCRATES]

How would that work exactly Soc? Do tell. By the grace of your hand alone? With your famous rapier wit? Black belt in origami?

Wouldn't it be easier if you just told everyone who wasn't there the first time where these posts are that relate to this rulebook you keep blathering on about. I've had a quick look and I can't find it. Enlighten me, please.

GJ

Do you not yet realise ? Or does everything have to be explained here to you as if you were a child ? Does it ?

 

[A Dashing Blade]

I would like you to post the rules as relevant according to your frame of reference according to what you call my violations, CYOF's violations and Bulldozer's violations.

Er . . . top of my head . . . multple nicks?

 

[SOCRATES]

Er . . . top of my head . . . multple nicks?

You again ? Wot do you want now ? To interrrupt with nonsense again ? You are just like him. No multiple nix is not the important element.

The important element is far more serious.

Let us wait and see.

 

[A Dashing Blade]

Is that before or after the 100k margin call?

Wrong answer, try again.

The 600k margin call?

 

[zupcon]

It is not what I want. It is what is required...

What is required is for you to post the rules as you first posted them as they applied to CYOF.

I would like you to post the rules as relevant according to your frame of reference according to what you call my violations, CYOF's violations and Bulldozer's violations.

I will be adding more to this later...

I will humour you, as today, I am not so bizzi, but before I do, lets partially clear up this frame of reference issue.

In my frame of reference (and indeed the frame of reference of many international standards organisations), the letter "A" is a capital letter, whereas the letter "a" is a lowercase letter, the letter "B" is a capital letter, wheras the letter "b" is a lowercase letter.

Do we share the same frame of reference with respect to upper and lowercase letters ?

I await your response with anticipation and interest

regards
zu

 

[SOCRATES]

Latest nonsense..

Signature Rule Violation
Hi Albert.

Someone's just pointed out to me that your signature is 'excessively long', which is one of the things in our site guidelines. As such, I've edited it a bit. Hope that's OK.


Matt
__________________
Matt

Please note that I do not subscribe to the threads I reply to, so if you want to make me aware of something, please do it via the PM facility.

Rosso...has just sent me this...hahahaha

First of all why has Zupcon not noticed this before...after all I have been a member for several years....so why did he miss including it in his rulebook.

Secondly Even if it is shortened, the truth is the truth and what I have chosen to state underlying all my posts obviously has finally landed and upset the monkey element.

And finally of course if I am banned for whatever trumped up reason, none of you here will find out the truth. For that you wil have to follow me elsewhere...and of course you all know where to find me.

LOL.

 

[wasp]

Pmsl...

and still am...!

 

[zupcon]

First of all why has Zupcon not noticed this before...after all I have been a member for several years....so why did he miss including it in his rulebook.

I and many others have pointed out this before, and for your information and enlightenment it is in the rule book, item 10.1 under signatures !

come on, make an effort and catch up with the rest of us

 

[A Dashing Blade]

No multiple nix is not the important element.

You asked about rule violations, I provided one ?

By the bye, I see our old friend ATLANTIC GHOST is viewing the boards again
http://www.theoptionsinsider.com/myaccount/profile.asp?id=104

 

[SOCRATES]

I and many others have pointed out this before, and for your information and enlightenment it is in the rule book, item 10.1 under signatures !

come on, make an effort and catch up with the rest of us

My replies will be made available to you free of censorship.

 

[SOCRATES]

....but not here....

 

[wasp]

My replies will be made available to you free of censorship.

....but not here....

What is the point of all the thread then....?

You are not seriously telling us that this whole thread was the most dire advertising campaign going??? You think everyone is going elsewhere now just to hear you say the same stuff there... bloody loon you are!

 

[zupcon]

....but not here....

Careful now, Youve already incured a 10 point penalty today and you might just be considered to be in violation of section 9 of the rules which states:

"We'll delete posts that, in our judgment, mention or link to our competitors for the sole purpose of encouraging our users to participate elsewhere "

regards
zu