With respect Mike, the whole point of the boards is that members can express any views they like...but by the same rule, they can expect to be challenged on those views....this is what makes a board and is the very reason members flock to threads like this.
So, when someone sets themselves up as an "expert retail trader" then they are going to attract attention and the more the better I have to say.
I concur with c_v, not because he's a tough northerner and I'm soft southerner that's scared pooless by him, but because this is also the view of admin'. Yep, we're in agreement! (Contrary to popular belief, Mods and admin don't always see eye to eye!)
When it comes to trading issues, historically, the boards are usually pretty good at self regulating. So, if someone spouts complete and utter bull poo - another member will flag it up. This has certainly happened in FoMo's case, right from when he first started posting. (For the record, please note that I'm
not saying FoMo posts rubbish - merely that others have questioned much of his output.) Members can then read the opposing views and decide for themselves who knows what's what and who's talking out of their derriere. All the while, the Mods keep the peace and deal with those who transgress into personal attacks and vitriol etc.
I think Shakone and some others have left simply because they tired of doing this again and again. I can sympathise with that, but to legislate against it opens up a Pandora's box of worms. For example, in light of the 'Mr. Fox' thread, I wondered if we could legislate as to what constitutes an acceptable statement or screen grab of a platform's trade blotter. In theory, it sounds simple, but in practice it will mean that anyone who doesn't like whatever the official T2W definition ends up being - will simply say it's obvious that (username's) statement is Photoshoped, cropped or manipulated in some way. Moreover, anyone who can't see it must be an idiot and then, because the mods don't delete the offending post(s) and ban the member - they must be in cahoots with the evil vendor! The conspiracy theorists have a field day. I've seen it a thousand times. So, I doubt legislation of this kind will solve anything; the arguments will continue. Ditto with what constitutes a 'live' call.
I will read this thread (and others on similar topics) and I'm always open to suggestions. I'll also give the matter some thought myself.
However, whatever goes before Sharky must not stifle debate, alienate members or impose any kind of restrictive view about trading. Some of you might say that good contributors have left T2W because they felt alienated by members they regard as trolls being allowed to post content they disapproved of. Not so, all they had to do was to use the Report Post function and then put the member concerned on ignore and carry on posting to the threads that interest them. Actually, if one looks around the site, there are a fair few excellent members who have done - and continue to do - exactly this. T2W cannot kowtow to the demands of individual members and shape the site into whatever they want it to be. Hopefully, the reason why is obvious. We're all different, we'd never agree! Besides, that's not what T2W is about and it's contrary to its ethos of free speech within the boundaries of the Community Constitution.
Tim.
