Trade to Win or Something Else?

[snowball9]

"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."

This is exatly my point. When the clowns appear and make their presence felt disrupting the thread etc . The mods tend to ban the wrong people in my view. The banned members then come back in to SMACK the clowns and get banned again! for having nicks and NOT for the points they are trying to make. something wrong somewhere? imho

How big is the % of clowns on here.?

s9

 

[jimbo57]

.

 

[barjon]

......................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............

jimbo

Oh dear, you do seem to have a very jaundiced view of life - you don't think comparing T2W with a totalitarian state is just a bit ott do you?

So far as sunday moderating is concerned I'm letting this roll along with too much interference at the moment but quite happy to do some housekeeping later if that would suit (without being accused of culling critical comment).

Unfortunately we need a bit more than a similarity of style to identify multiple nicks but I'm searching them out where I can - kentucky shrub the latest.

cheers

jon

 

[jimbo57]

.

 

[Splitlink]

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.

I'm wide awake, thank you. Please don't mention the word democratic, it makes me suspicious. Do you run a democracy in your business or, even, family? I know I don't and, neither did my father and neither does Blair. In fact, I know of no one who uses democratic principles in the management of his own affairs and I'm damned sure that T2W is no exception.

If I choose to use this board it is with the conditions imposed by the T2W, warts and all. There may be some minor changes negotiable, but only if the board sees that it is their best interests to concede them. With 60,000 members they wouldn't miss me one iota. I'm here because I like it.

Split

 

[jimbo57]

.

 

[barjon]

mmm, well jimbo has asked sharky to remove him as a member. I can't do that but I can put in a temporary ban if the excesses keep coming.

I've deleted the last eleven or so posts to remove the fanning of the flames and those excesses in response

jon

 

[jimbo57]

.

 

[counter_violent]

mmm, well jimbo has asked sharky to remove him as a member. I can't do that but I can put in a temporary ban if the excesses keep coming.

I've deleted the last eleven or so posts to remove the fanning of the flames and those excesses in response

jon

Heres a challenge then. I dare you to give a temporary ban to the purple ponce who's sole intention is to hound the fox once the scent has been detected.

Like I said previously, it all ties in nicely with people and their agenda's.

C V

 

[jimbo57]

.

 

[dbphoenix]

Heres a challenge then. I dare you to give a temporary ban to the purple ponce who's sole intention is to hound the fox once the scent has been detected.

Ain't gonna happen. Which is why I've suggested that the mods abandon the post-deleting business, leave the posts where they are, and let the members take care of themselves.

Db

 

[barjon]

ok jimbo - i give you belated permission to quote my private message :cheesy:

The previous members posts you have seen disappear were deleted by them. Even if it was as easy as you suggest - it's not - there is still some debate about whether it's right to delete posts people have made on a public board. Some sites, I believe, do not allow deletion after a certain time.

cheers

jon

 

[jimbo57]

.

 

[dbphoenix]

ok jimbo - i give you belated permission to quote my private message :cheesy:

The previous members posts you have seen disappear were deleted by them. Even if it was as easy as you suggest - it's not - there is still some debate about whether it's right to delete posts people have made on a public board. Some sites, I believe, do not allow deletion after a certain time.

cheers

jon

Depends on who's doing the deleting. If a member chooses to edit or delete his own posts, that's up to him. The mods, however, ought to leave the posts alone. If a thread has gone irretrievably off track, move it to "the lounge" and let it die a natural death.

Db

 

[Sharky]

Just finished reading (what's left) of the thread. I was away over the weekend and was worried it might implode. I should have probably closed it and re-opened it on my return. Nevermind.

As Barjon said it's raised some important areas of discussion and even if Jimbo57 is no longer hear to discuss them I think it's worth following them up. I'll try my best to draw them out tomorrow and we'll see what comes of them.

 

[Sharky]

Okay I think there are three issues we need to tackle:

1) T2W Team and moderation. If we can recruit some new moderators, then I'm perfectly happy to take the T2W Team out of the mix. I've spoken to them and they'd be happy to hand over their badges. We would just need to ensure there is as much cover as there is now - possibly more. As I've always said there's never been any undue influence exerted on anyone moderating the forums, but if it's beneficial to avoid even the accusation of a conflict of interests - then so be it.

2) Editing/deleting posts. I think it's in the interest of the site and public nature of the forums to put a limit on when a post can be editing (and effectively deleting), we can easily set a time - perhaps 2 or 3 days. Having disgruntled members removing their posts and effectively ruining continuity of threads isn't fair to those that have contributed to that thread.

3) Vendor tag - I think that this whole issue of vendors on the site, their visibility and the assumption that if you have the tag then you're simply posting to sell something needs to be further addressed. Perhaps all we need is to make the vendor tag more discreet (small logo alongside the other logos below) - or remove it and instead separate the www button by left aligning it. To be honest I've never seen Vendor tags on any other forum and am slightly concerned that it creates a perception that the forum is more commercial than others when in fact it isn't. Still, we introduced it for a reason - so whatever changes we make if any would need to still address the concerns over vendors covertly marketing their wares (a problem that every forum faces!).

I'm going to run these past our Focus Group first, as that's what they are there to discuss - and if we think it necessary we may consult the wider membership too.

 

[temptrader]

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.

Even though I don't really like you, Socco, you are completely right. Trading is, at the most fundamental level, a brutal game, and many would not admit this to themselves.

Dawkins quote Gore Vidal's maxim when he talks about satisficing systems instead of competitive systems, and remarks that living things do not do "enough" to stay alive, but alas are competing against other such living things: It is not enough to succeed, others must fail

 

[des44]

Even though I don't really like you, Socco,

That's just not fair Temp.

d-

 

[temptrader]

dess44,

I don't really want to reply to you but here goes:

1) it's not fair that certain people are better at trading than others

2) it's not fair that only a very small percentage of the population can ever make it - regardless of how hard they work for it

3) it's not fair that no matter if you had a great mentor overseeing you, you still won't be able to make it if you don't have it in you

4) it's not fair that there are hundreds upon hundreds of scam merchants out there who would brutally exploit the naiveity of people who think that this is an easy game and that there is easy money to be made

I respect what Skimbleshanks says, and am beginning to see where Socrates is coming from.

 

[des44]

???

?????
I was referring to your apparent rudeness, not to the different abilities and levels of success of traders. How you started off your post to Socrates was far from forum etiquette---in my humble opinion.

d-

dess44,

I don't really want to reply to you but here goes:

1) it's not fair that certain people are better at trading than others

2) it's not fair that only a very small percentage of the population can ever make it - regardless of how hard they work for it

3) it's not fair that no matter if you had a great mentor overseeing you, you still won't be able to make it if you don't have it in you

4) it's not fair that there are hundreds upon hundreds of scam merchants out there who would brutally exploit the naiveity of people who think that this is an easy game and that there is easy money to be made

I respect what Skimbleshanks says, and am beginning to see where Socrates is coming from.