frugi
1
- Messages
- 1,843
- Likes
- 133
Salty Gibbon was banned over a year ago for persistent rudeness and disruption. He was not a vendor. His name has only come to light again recently because someone suspected that he had returned under a new alias (and thus contrary to site guidelines) MarvinS, who is a vendor. So far no proof of this allegation has been forthcoming. However if any did come to light I assure you appropriate action would be taken.
As a moderator I have never considered whether someone is a vendor as it has absolutely nothing to do with our purpose on the site. I do not undertstand why you feel my decisions might be altered or biased in light of someone's vendor (and thus, in some cases, providing revenue for T2W) status. After all, the mods are not paid by T2W and have no interest in the company's income, beyond a hope that it continues to pay for the site's existence. If anything, in fact, I am probably more strict with (or at least wary of) vendors as I am all too aware of the of tricks some of them like to play.
Your point regarding the change of relationship is a fair one and I will give it some more thought, though again I think it would be more suitable for me to withdraw and let someone who is part of T2W the company and more qualified to discuss this take over.
As a moderator I have never considered whether someone is a vendor as it has absolutely nothing to do with our purpose on the site. I do not undertstand why you feel my decisions might be altered or biased in light of someone's vendor (and thus, in some cases, providing revenue for T2W) status. After all, the mods are not paid by T2W and have no interest in the company's income, beyond a hope that it continues to pay for the site's existence. If anything, in fact, I am probably more strict with (or at least wary of) vendors as I am all too aware of the of tricks some of them like to play.
Your point regarding the change of relationship is a fair one and I will give it some more thought, though again I think it would be more suitable for me to withdraw and let someone who is part of T2W the company and more qualified to discuss this take over.
Last edited:
Froogle Truth
Newbie
- Messages
- 4
- Likes
- 2
Finally when we give you the evidence will you confirm, that you will ban Salty Gibbon again please, especially now since he's denied it.
frugi
1
- Messages
- 1,843
- Likes
- 133
Is that it? I had a grain silo prepared for the storm but it seems a tea cup will do. 
Could you point out the posts by MarvinS that you feel deserve(d) moderation of some sort? It is possible that we missed some - as Rossored has said we simply cannot read every post on every thread and thus often rely on members to use the Report Post button. In the case of Marvin's posts I don't think any have been reported, but I will check this now.
Sharky has already pointed out that the bulk of revenues come from clicks, not commissions / referral fees, or 'kickbacks' as you call them (there's an unpleasant negative emotive tone to that word). But yes, some members will no doubt avail themselves of certain commercial products and on occasion this will generate a commission for T2W. A fresh supply of members is undoubtedly better than no new members in this respect for the site, although existing members are apt to purchase the occasional product too. e.g I can save £ buying my charting from the store. I don't see a problem with that. You clearly do, but your post doesn't leave me any the wiser as to why, sorry. Honestly, I'm not being deliberately obtuse or disingenuous - I simply don't get it.
MarvinS certainly ought to have a vendor avatar and I will PM him immediately to ask him to edit his profile. I'm sorry this has not been done sooner. A few vendors missed the announcement of the new rules, it was bound to happen.
Secondly, the thread is not "run" by an SB at all. It is designed as an open forum for members to discuss aspects of their service. Vendors are there to respond to questions. Indeed, there are guidelines designed specifically to prevent vendors from using such threads as a vehicle to push their wares.
So now the moderation seems "loose"? Can you be more specific? Do you think we are not adequately moderating some vendors' posts, e.g deliberately letting them use the discussion forums to advertise, or be 'downright rude' or mislead potential clients? I thought your problem was actually the opposite one, i.e that it was too tight in regard to those who might criticise a vendor's product. Either way, your voice is so far conspicuous by its solitude in this matter.
Well the three methods of revenue generation, ones common to just about every commercial website in existence, have already been explained by Sharky and Rossored in the Feedback forum. I would have thought that most people, perhaps excepting the terminally naive, would have already been aware of the situation.
But in order to protect those precious few who have never been on the Internet before, would you like us to warn every new member that advertising exists on the site and some of the advertisers might want their business and furthermore in a few cases this will result in a small referral fee for T2W? Sounds like the nanny state gone mad to me, but I suppose it could be added to the registration process if enough people want it. But so far you speak for what looks like a tiny minority of members and our surveys and focus group would signally back up this view.
Also, accusing T2W of providing suspect information in order to juice up revenues is plain wrong and offensive. There are obvious banner adverts, which I wouldn't class as information; then the forums, the K-LAB and the Traderpedia, which do provide certain information. Are you implying that these areas of the site deliberately contain misinformnation in order to lure members towards certain vendors who have adverts on the site? I can assure you that is completely untrue.
Thanks. I could say the same about this weird campaign you are running, but it's only a trivial subjective opinion. And yes, I am passing on the reins of moderation soon, but still active for the time being, as you can no doubt see.
Anyway, though I disagree with (or at least fail to understand) the thrust of your argument, it is at least a pleasure to be able to engage in a civilised discussion again. It is a shame others can't follow your example instead of resorting to what I can only describe as childish internet terrorism, or trolling for short.
jimbo57 said:
Could you point out the posts by MarvinS that you feel deserve(d) moderation of some sort? It is possible that we missed some - as Rossored has said we simply cannot read every post on every thread and thus often rely on members to use the Report Post button. In the case of Marvin's posts I don't think any have been reported, but I will check this now.
Sharky has already pointed out that the bulk of revenues come from clicks, not commissions / referral fees, or 'kickbacks' as you call them (there's an unpleasant negative emotive tone to that word). But yes, some members will no doubt avail themselves of certain commercial products and on occasion this will generate a commission for T2W. A fresh supply of members is undoubtedly better than no new members in this respect for the site, although existing members are apt to purchase the occasional product too. e.g I can save £ buying my charting from the store. I don't see a problem with that. You clearly do, but your post doesn't leave me any the wiser as to why, sorry. Honestly, I'm not being deliberately obtuse or disingenuous - I simply don't get it.
MarvinS certainly ought to have a vendor avatar and I will PM him immediately to ask him to edit his profile. I'm sorry this has not been done sooner. A few vendors missed the announcement of the new rules, it was bound to happen.
Secondly, the thread is not "run" by an SB at all. It is designed as an open forum for members to discuss aspects of their service. Vendors are there to respond to questions. Indeed, there are guidelines designed specifically to prevent vendors from using such threads as a vehicle to push their wares.
So now the moderation seems "loose"? Can you be more specific? Do you think we are not adequately moderating some vendors' posts, e.g deliberately letting them use the discussion forums to advertise, or be 'downright rude' or mislead potential clients? I thought your problem was actually the opposite one, i.e that it was too tight in regard to those who might criticise a vendor's product.
Either way, your voice is so far conspicuous by its solitude in this matter. Well the three methods of revenue generation, ones common to just about every commercial website in existence, have already been explained by Sharky and Rossored in the Feedback forum. I would have thought that most people, perhaps excepting the terminally naive, would have already been aware of the situation.
But in order to protect those precious few who have never been on the Internet before, would you like us to warn every new member that advertising exists on the site and some of the advertisers might want their business and furthermore in a few cases this will result in a small referral fee for T2W? Sounds like the nanny state gone mad to me, but I suppose it could be added to the registration process if enough people want it. But so far you speak for what looks like a tiny minority of members and our surveys and focus group would signally back up this view.
Also, accusing T2W of providing suspect information in order to juice up revenues is plain wrong and offensive. There are obvious banner adverts, which I wouldn't class as information; then the forums, the K-LAB and the Traderpedia, which do provide certain information. Are you implying that these areas of the site deliberately contain misinformnation in order to lure members towards certain vendors who have adverts on the site? I can assure you that is completely untrue.
Thanks. I could say the same about this weird campaign you are running, but it's only a trivial subjective opinion. And yes, I am passing on the reins of moderation soon, but still active for the time being, as you can no doubt see.
Anyway, though I disagree with (or at least fail to understand) the thrust of your argument, it is at least a pleasure to be able to engage in a civilised discussion again. It is a shame others can't follow your example instead of resorting to what I can only describe as childish internet terrorism, or trolling for short.
Last edited:
frugi
1
- Messages
- 1,843
- Likes
- 133
The standard definition of "kickback" includes unethical behaviour and secrecy as part of the meaning. That is why I find it negative.
This thread was started by Racer who was making a complaint with regard to their spread policy, so hardly an auspicious start if we were trying to promote them!
I am not going to read the whole thread to please you. If there are posts you find offensive then please find them and report them yourself.
Regarding your penultimate paragraph you will need to provide some specific examples of this "suspect information" if anyone is going to take your concerns seriously. Facts require evidence and so far you have provided none.
Re your final paragraph - Well if that is true I wish some of those people who agree with you would post about it and offer something constructive to the discussion.
This thread was started by Racer who was making a complaint with regard to their spread policy, so hardly an auspicious start if we were trying to promote them!
I am not going to read the whole thread to please you. If there are posts you find offensive then please find them and report them yourself.
Regarding your penultimate paragraph you will need to provide some specific examples of this "suspect information" if anyone is going to take your concerns seriously. Facts require evidence and so far you have provided none.
Re your final paragraph - Well if that is true I wish some of those people who agree with you would post about it and offer something constructive to the discussion.
Last edited:
frugi
1
- Messages
- 1,843
- Likes
- 133
MarvinS while you are here, please can you go into your user profile
http://www.trade2win.com/boards/profile.php
and at the bottom there is a drop down box to add a vendor tag to your name. Thank you.
http://www.trade2win.com/boards/profile.php
and at the bottom there is a drop down box to add a vendor tag to your name. Thank you.
barjon
Legendary member
- Messages
- 10,752
- Likes
- 1,863
jimbo57 said:
jimbo
mmm, whatever content may have appeared in this thread as it went on, i think you'll find it was actually started by racer - legendary mummy bear
- a long standing and respected member. Facts musn't be seen to ruin a good story, though good trading
jon
frugi
1
- Messages
- 1,843
- Likes
- 133
Ah so we have established that it is text contained in some ads not the site information content (e.g klab, forums) that bothers you. Good, that is progress of a sort.
I don't read the ads as a matter of course as I have no interest in them, though once I did complain about one on the front page that I found offensive and it was removed. The Google ads are a relatively new development and as I said before I would be uncomfortable if I saw one promoting a vendor who is known to be a fraud. Of course this returns to the thorny problem of defining a fraud or scam in the first place, which is especially difficult to do in the world of trading systems and coaching, for example.
That said, is it T2W's responsibility to act as moral guardians? You seem to be giving our members, especially the ones new to trading, scant credit for their ability to make informed decisions having conducted their own research into any vendors in whose services they may be interested. How far should we be expected to protect them?
If I was a teenage girl reading a magazine with an advert for "Impulse" that strongly implied a single application of this sophisticated and exotic fragrance would summon flocks of devastatingly handsome boys to my beck and call, would you want me protected from the horrible truth that actually I would smell cheap and the opposite effect was in fact probably more likely? Would you then claim the magazine editors were acting immorally by allowing such filthy lies to seep into young and innocent minds? Adverts are designed to sell, so of course they are going to make the product sound wonderful.
Having said that, if you could find an advert on the site that is a proven blatant lie, a real dirty fraudulent lie that misleads well beyond the example I just gave, then there is a good chance it would be removed.
I don't read the ads as a matter of course as I have no interest in them, though once I did complain about one on the front page that I found offensive and it was removed. The Google ads are a relatively new development and as I said before I would be uncomfortable if I saw one promoting a vendor who is known to be a fraud. Of course this returns to the thorny problem of defining a fraud or scam in the first place, which is especially difficult to do in the world of trading systems and coaching, for example.
That said, is it T2W's responsibility to act as moral guardians? You seem to be giving our members, especially the ones new to trading, scant credit for their ability to make informed decisions having conducted their own research into any vendors in whose services they may be interested. How far should we be expected to protect them?
If I was a teenage girl reading a magazine with an advert for "Impulse" that strongly implied a single application of this sophisticated and exotic fragrance would summon flocks of devastatingly handsome boys to my beck and call, would you want me protected from the horrible truth that actually I would smell cheap and the opposite effect was in fact probably more likely? Would you then claim the magazine editors were acting immorally by allowing such filthy lies to seep into young and innocent minds? Adverts are designed to sell, so of course they are going to make the product sound wonderful.
Having said that, if you could find an advert on the site that is a proven blatant lie, a real dirty fraudulent lie that misleads well beyond the example I just gave, then there is a good chance it would be removed.
Last edited:
The truth is this - WorldSpreads was never given the chance on this bulletin board and was never allowed to express, in terms of answering questions or to answer customer queries. From the off set traders posted negative comments but would not trust me that things would be resolved. I hope you appreciate the size of the task that had been placed upon me! This thread was littered with hate and traders that were intent on diluting a new spread betting company. Fine one may say that Capital Spreads have marketed themselves very well on this board. I would hold my hands up and say that we are not squeeky clean yet, but so what flash marketing does not mean everything. It is the propensity for traders to want everything now and so it should be. Traders emotions have become so intense to the point that it is a requirement to have everything now. I as a trader would not assume that WorldSpreads has all that you need now, but when i started at Finspreads 6 years ago they were in the same position and when i started at WS we had the intention to develop for you a service, which meant the tightest spreads and the best systems. Our obligation to you stands resolute! And with so many traders coming to WS from CMC and IG this proves one thing to me, that traders are fed up of given the same old story.
I do not care whether this thread is a positive or negative promotion of WS but more importantly i have realised that the online trading boom is happening now in the UK. Being a succesful trader is the most important thing, being with whatever provider that gives you the best opportunities to be a Winner is the most important thing. Having read through this thread i would agree in most part with you that this in a negative thread, but i also ask that now is your chance to un-wind your negative feelings about spread betting companies. Tell me what you want, our development team and trading team are experienced to the n-th degree to be able to answer whatever you want. I apologise now if i have perhaps been slow to respond but sometimes you realise your mistakes and move on! Would it be possible to make a fresh start on this thread? For the purposes of your benefit...
Regards
MarvinS
(Not Salty and no more insults)
I do not care whether this thread is a positive or negative promotion of WS but more importantly i have realised that the online trading boom is happening now in the UK. Being a succesful trader is the most important thing, being with whatever provider that gives you the best opportunities to be a Winner is the most important thing. Having read through this thread i would agree in most part with you that this in a negative thread, but i also ask that now is your chance to un-wind your negative feelings about spread betting companies. Tell me what you want, our development team and trading team are experienced to the n-th degree to be able to answer whatever you want. I apologise now if i have perhaps been slow to respond but sometimes you realise your mistakes and move on! Would it be possible to make a fresh start on this thread? For the purposes of your benefit...
Regards
MarvinS
(Not Salty and no more insults)
rossored
Senior member
- Messages
- 2,103
- Likes
- 56
well done jimbo. The fork would be going elsewhere if I still had it in my hands, believe me. thanks for visiting my site though - google rankings and all that
yes, i am about, deleting your pointless argument with socrates. Feel free to carry on, i'm about to retire - i'll delete what's left to come in the morning.
yes, i am about, deleting your pointless argument with socrates. Feel free to carry on, i'm about to retire - i'll delete what's left to come in the morning.
rossored
Senior member
- Messages
- 2,103
- Likes
- 56
MarvinS said:
If you mean this from a moderation perspective rather than being shot down by potential customers perspective, then that is simply not true, Marvin.
Every single SB company, DA broker or whatever only has to ask permission to post and have a non-promotional discussion and it will be granted. The IB thread (and IB have never advertised with us, by the way) is a shining example of this.