I think the Gainers sections would have a lot more meaning, if at least after the gain, they were ABOVE the original $100K line. I don’t think anyone is impressed when someone went from 20K to 40K. Gaining back some of a huge deficit is not very useful or impressive.
It would be at least a basic filter to take out some of the comedy…
Ross, you must be a writer, or I just love to read your stuff; I’ve seen dudes go from 100K to 20K to 55k, and they make the " hottest list?"…You made the post for me…someday, someone will check the " Big Cat" negative 3 million " after real trade factor"…Jon
my bad, yesterday the 3 million was negative, today the 3 million is positive. Wow? How times change?..Jon
I strongly agree. – Not that I don’t appreciate the comedy 
What about systems which go up to 300K, down to 150K and back up to 200K? Should they be allowed to appear on the lists just because they are above 100K, but not ones which went to 50K and back to 80K?
There are already tools to search for systems. These lists are not research tools, but to sometimes feature systems one might overlook otherwise. I am fine with them. What I would not be fine with is a featured list based on one person’s preferences.
- Fanus
hmmm - someone is on a “one person’s preference” fetish.
Why not add a “New ‘x’ day equity high” search? It would be similar to the ‘new weekly highs’ list but at longer intervals. It might be a bit tough for MK to program, but if that ‘x’ could be specified by the user on the fly, that would be powerful.
Very constructive and insightful response which adds much value to the topic.
And your “one person’s preferences” is becoming a suddenly common worry of yours. There was never a “one person’s preferences”. People make suggestions. You get all wrapped up in things that have little relevance. Who cares who suggested things, as long as C2 goes forward? MK is a big boy and decides things based on his business decisions.
And the comment is quite valid. Most of what I have seen from you in the past when I post, is about who has the right to say what. We don’t need C2 censors.
Saying I have a fetish because I disagree with you is a valid point and that I am censoring you? Quite a bit of a stretch to get all that from my post, isn’t it? I made a valid counterpoint with regard to your “suggestion” and you chose to counter with a personal attack which doesn’t add any value to the topic and is not based in reality.
You are quite right. We do not need censors. That include you playing censor. I have just as much right to raise counter points as you have making suggestions.
I am talking about your incessant string of posts over months, where you try to decide who has the right to say what. It is called trying to be a censor.
And I am surprised about your “personal atttack” thought. You remain hung up after the “hold & hope” discussions about one person’s views or preferences being imposed on C2. If you do not know what I am talking about, then you may have serious alzheimer’s
Oh, I thought we were talking about the “suggestion” raised in this thread. My bad.
Since you apparently doesn’t have anything relevant to add to the topic, I will bow out now.
