VSAtrader / Socrates discussion

[Over the Top]

All the mods are aware whenever someone gets banned, and if there's disagreement about it, it's discussed and cases are presented etc.

Aware is one thing. Are all the mods given the whole truth when someone is banned or the version that's circulated to the membership as a whole?

 

[Over the Top]

SOCRATES: There is a world of difference between a metaphorical 'good kicking' as in being taken to task by effective use of the English language in a manner which does not breach trade2win site guidelines on these boards, such as you yourself take such pride in, and say the very real 'good kicking' that you might encounter in the real world administered by ruffians or even by paid minders, perhaps even ex-police personnel retained for that very purpose. Rook. Crook. Book. Cook. I am for some unaccountable reason reminded of my Janet & John books when at school and that phrase came to mind.

Still no response. As quiet as the mud in the Thames at a low tide.

 

[LevII]

Whatever the position Socrates really seems to p*ss people off.

How about a poll, 3 questions only:

1. Ban Socrates and delete all his posts.
2. Ban Socrates and keep his wisdom for posterity.
3. Keep Socrates and allow him to carry on as at present.

 

[Over the Top]

LevII - that's wholly undemocratic and unfair. As much as some, many(?) might find his posts a pain in the donkey, unless he transgresses the site's guidelines there is no basis for asking for his removal.

I doubt any poll would be allowed. Quite rightly.

No. Let's enjoy the prospect of finding a more elegant solution.

 

[dc2000]

Coventry

Or as Rosso says hit the report bad post button

 

[LevII]

LevII - that's wholly undemocratic and unfair. As much as some, many(?) might find his posts a pain in the donkey, unless he transgresses the site's guidelines there is no basis for asking for his removal.

I doubt any poll would be allowed. Quite rightly.

No. Let's enjoy the prospect of finding a more elegant solution.

Nothing wrong with a bit of totalitarianism in the right circumstances. However, if I did not have a democratic streak I would not have included option 3.

 

[LevII]

Coventry

Or as Rosso says hit the report bad post button

The poor man would be overwhelmed.

 

[dbphoenix]

At the risk of being banned myself, to state that Albert receives no special treatment is ludicrous. Witness the first post from his thread of two years ago:

From the Moderators:

PLEASE READ THIS - and heed the warning

This thread is devoted to Socrates' allegories relating to trader psychology, which combine to help raise advanced traders from the basement to the rarified levels of trading attained by very few. This thread forms part of the 'dark arts' of trading using just price and volume bars (no indicators or signals), and on this thread the practitioners of price and volume are referred to as 'darksiders'.

This thread is NOT to be used for debate, nor for posting your opinions of the style/manner in which this thread is formed - it is solely for those who are prepared to respond in a respectful and educated manner to the allegories and experiences posed by Socrates.

Debate and opinions can be posted on 8,000 threads on these boards but NOT on this thread nor the No Indicators Revisited thread.

TAKE NOTE:
ANYONE WHO DISRUPTS THIS THREAD by making repeated comment which is deemed by any Mod to be unfit (including but not limited to being rude, personal, aggressive, highly opinionated, egotistical, antagonistic, pointless or stupid) WILL BE BANNED, initially for one week (and extended for any further violation including use of duplicate nicks), and/or their POSTS WILL BE REMOVED without further reference to the poster.

Regrettably this has had to be stated as there are a handful of posters on these boards who have neither the manners nor the respect to allow other traders to share their valuable knowledge with others in posts on this thread, and on the No Indicators Revisted thread, without being attacked.

We are required to be "respectful" of Albert for some reason, while he is not required to be respectful in return. We are not allowed to be "rude, personal, aggressive . . . " at the risk of being banned, but Albert is given free rein to be as rude and personal etc as he pleases.

If you guys want to protect him for some reason, that's your prerogative. But please don't expect the members to believe that this protection does not exist.

--Db

 

[dc2000]

Rosso

How can you differentiate between "politely rude" and "directly rude" being rude is being rude

And for the record I was banned for the following post which was deemed disruptive to the Soc thread

"If Naz or Richard posts on these boards they back their strategies with evidence for all to see.
Socrates posts and he doesn't even trade, no one asks why

WAKE UP SMELL THE COFFEE"

 

[Bigbusiness]

I think it was Skinbleshanks that was moderating when Socrates was getting the special treatment. She is no longer a moderator and hasn't been here for a long time.

 

[dbphoenix]

I think it was Skinbleshanks that was moderating when Socrates was getting the special treatment. She is no longer a moderator and hasn't been here for a long time.

It's true that she is no longer here. But the special treatment continues.

As others have pointed out, that Albert uses what some might call "sophisticated" language in order to be derisive, condescending, insulting, contemptuous, disdainful, or whatever terms one uses to describe his invective does not change its intent, and it most certainly does not alter its effect. Witness this thread, and the reasons for its having been created in the first place.

Of course, if one is allowed to say whatever one pleases as long as the language is sufficiently arcane, then all sorts of possibilities present themselves.

--Db

 

[Over the Top]

I think it was Skinbleshanks that was moderating when Socrates was getting the special treatment.

I think you might just find she was getting a bit of special treatment herself.

 

[Over the Top]

What's the betting this thread gets closed on some pretext or other?

We've already witnessed unjustified post deletion. And the moderator responsible has refused to respond to a reasonable request to explain why they operated outside of site guidelines.

I'm sure many of is have also fallen foul of any number of the unwritten 'rules' to which only the moderators are privy. And are on the very brink of being banned. Or they could also invent a reason after the fact for the banning, along with scenario. That seems to work well in many cases.

 

[dsn]

I think you might just find she was getting a bit of special treatment herself.

He didn't tie her to a chair as well did he?

 

[dc2000]

true BB
I wasn't sure if Rosso was referring to the recent banning s or previous banning s when he said
"I am not aware of anyone who has been banned for specifically "having a go" at Socrates."

I have just been reading the site guidelines and as well as the ones I have broken there is one or two that Soc is definitely stretching

 

[Over the Top]

If you're looking for transgressions of site guidelines, look no further.

http://www.trade2win.com/boards/showpost.php?p=215463&postcount=22

2. Unacceptable Content

2.1 The use of inappropriate or offensive language is not permitted in these forums.
2.2 Unacceptable language includes, but is not limited to, any language or content that is sexually oriented, sexually suggestive or abusive, pornographic, harassing, defamatory, libelous, vulgar, obscene, insulting, threatening, profane, hateful, or that contains racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable material of any kind.
2.3 Posting or referencing sexually explicit images or other offensive content.
2.4 Using asterisks or other symbols instead of the actual letters in an offensive word is still considered a violation if the vulgarity is discernible.

I draw your attention to clause 2.4

No action appears to have been taken.

Some appear to be more equal than others.

 

[dc2000]

Does anyone know why Chartman doesn't post anymore?

 

[dsn]

Seriously though, the issue of moderator bias just goes round and round. I think people tend to stew on things until they blow up in threads like this, by which time it's too late.

Personally I have never tried using the 'report bad post' button as Rosso has suggested above, and has encouraged us to do if there is a problem. So perhaps we should all try and remember to make considered use of this facility from now on and see how things go.

When you look at the number of posts that go through this site vs the size of the staff available to moderate, some help in pointing out potential problems would probably be appreciated.

 

[nkhoi]

The main complaint that I have about t2w is that their are too many vendors lurking in the background.....

As for Socrates I don`t have a problem with him (if anyone does I suggest that they just ignore him), there are many worse people than him on ET another favourite of mine. What does concern me is when certain members have been banned for disagreeing with him.

I don't remember any time ET banned someone because it favor somebody else.

 

[counter_violent]

Does anyone know why Chartman doesn't post anymore?

He explained some time ago about a renovation project that would be taking up all his time .

I'm loathed to use the "report bad post" facility , it could just turn the pantomime into a bigger farce than it is already !

Much prefer to stand up to the offender and hold them to account !

CV