Do system owners have control over the threads in their respective message boards?
The reason I ask is that I would have sworn that there was a thread called “Down a lot” that made some pretty specific statements (that I assume could be backed up with emails) and now that thread seems to be gone. MK did you delete this thread or did the owner of the system under which it was posted do it or did I dream the whole thing?
pete,
its still there - its on the hawk-fx forum
W
“its still there - its on the hawk-fx forum” I must be blind, I can’t see it. I will look again.
You’re referring to the thread titled “down a bit”, right?
W
Ahhh - no, it was a thread titled “Down a lot”, I assume the name was a play on the other thread’s name. It was a brand new thread posted from someone who had a bad experience last November I believe. I have a thumbnail picture of it in my local google desktop cache but unfortunately its not legible…hmmmm
No, I did not remove any messages. And yes, system vendors can remove threads at will from their own forums. This is something I am still pondering.
I am beginning to think that I ought to make having a public message board for each system mandatory, and change the rules so that vendors cannot remove messages. (Not necessarily in response to this particular incident. It is something that has come up several times before.)
On the vendors’ side, I believe that C2 is a “platform” and vendors should be able to use it and run their own business as they see fit. However, I’m now leaning towards the view that C2 itself is compromised when traders (i.e. subscribers) aren’t allowed to exchange information freely about systems.
I welcome opinions, pro and con.
MK
Thanks MK. I think that the post, while negative, was not inflammatory or rude and it seemed to contain factual information about a previous subscribers experience that would be very relevent to the current subscribers. I am disappointed to see that it has been deleted by the vendor rather than rebutted if it contained factual errors.
On the more general question I agree with everything you wrote, I find it strange when a system doesnt have a board to post to because the vendor didnt create one (thus preventing subscribers from sharing their experiences with each other) and I dont think the vendors should have the ability to moderate those boards.
Matthew
I consider it absolutely mandatory that system vendors cannot remove negative posts regarding their systems, as long as they are factual and not abusive or rude, otherwise what you have created here is no different from the high gloss ad pages in futures magazine, where vendors can misrepresent at will…
As I understand the purpose of this website is objective monitoring of trading systems and in that objectivity free and uncensored speech should play an integral part.
If I would have known the numbers that I posted here earlier, namely a 35% drawdown of total account value within a few trading days, I would have steered away clearly from a system like that and not let myself be tempted by a 20% a month return history.
Peter
I agree with you 100% Peter.
The idea of this site is that people can dicover the truth about traders and trading systems.
I’m sure many subscribers have been burnt in the past either by
con-artists or by well meaning but inept / delusional traders.
It is critical to the ethos of this site that forums are kept open and honest.
David Nickerson
Irrational men, though impotent, can disappoint, deceive, and betray the innocent; if they do turn to crime, they can rob, enslave or worse. This is one reason that one needs to practice the virtue of justice (to distinguish between the good and the evil). It is also a reason why man needs to live in a proper society, one designed to protect individual rights. Some evil and thus some harm to the innocent are unavoidable; no philosophy can guarantee virtue, since virtue is a matter of choice. In a proper society, however, evil is a marginal element. When men live by rational principles, the evil, so far as men can identify its presence, is ostracized and stopped. Under these conditions, even its power to destroy is largely nullified - except in regard to the evildoer himself.
Capitalism rewards the pursuit of rational self-interest. Since rights are inalienable, a man can succeed ultimately only by creative thought and action, not by sacrificing others through the use of force or fraud. Nor can he succeed by sacrificing himself - whether through selfless service or plain irrationality, such as being irresponsible, whim-ridden, context-dropping, self-contradictory and short-range.
Pete, looks like the poster of the down a lot thread reposted his synopsis in this forum so as not to allow Mark to delete it.
http://www.collective2.com/cgi-perl/board.mpl?want=listmsgs&boardid=9323885&threadhilite=1581&displayblock=8_7&sorttype=alpha&session=24850779771323226118328210264622298#FIRSTSTAR
