should service providers be allowed to have multiple user names ?

New comment
 
  • 58% (38)
  • 31% (20)
  • 11% (7)
Total voters: 65
 

I don't want to shake a hornets nest here, but this is news to me about multiple user names, if you don' provide a service then fine, if you do provide a service, you should have only one, could anyone give a credible answer as to why they would need multiple names?

EDIT, in my personal opinion, the policy should be changed/left as is, on the outcome of this poll, with that said, I could only agree if over 50% of registered users vote, no good if the outcome is with minimal voters.

 

If some person is having 4 or 6 usernames so he can vote by all his usernames :) (some of them have ...).

As to my opinion so it is ethical situation (question about ethics): to have or not to have (many usernames for one man). Serious people (traders, signal providers etc) are keeping their personal reputation because forex is very personalized in anyway. So, serious traders/providers are having just 1 username. But I have no idea how to regulate it by rules for example. 

 
I think where money exchanging hands is the point, if you are not in the market to make money then no problem,
 
newdigital:

If some person is having 4 or 6 usernames so he can vote by all his usernames :) (some of them have ...).

As to my opinion so it is ethical situation (question about ethics): to have or not to have (many usernames for one man). Serious people (traders, signal providers etc) are keeping their personal reputation because forex is very personalized in anyway. So, serious traders/providers are having just 1 username. But I have no idea how to regulate it by rules for example. 

CAN DO IT BY " ID " ?
 
easiest way, make it a requirement  for any new service providers, you cannot undo what's been done but you can move forward from here.
 
It is ethical situation so how to regulate it? For my opinion - there is good way to regulate this situation: to provide more possibilities to the members. Because why the members are having many usernames? Because of unrealized possibilities. I agree with rob about money related issue but if not (money related)? And the forum ... is what for? For traders to share experience and to help each other. And for coders to share experience and to help each other. And if one person is having 4 or 6 usernames so he is not serious regular guy anyway. But if it is not prohibited so .... no idea. 
 
The origin of this forum (MT4) was for sharing, helping, advice, it has now evolved into a market place too, if there is a good reason for multiple names then ok, let's hear it, 
 
rob:

I don't want to shake a hornets nest here, but this is news to me about multiple user names, if you don' provide a service then fine, if you do provide a service, you should have only one, could anyone give a credible answer as to why they would need multiple names?

EDIT, in my personal opinion, the policy should be changed/left as is, on the outcome of this poll, with that said, I could only agree if over 50% of registered users vote, no good if the outcome is with minimal voters.

rob 
I think where money exchanging hands is the point, if you are not in the market to make money then no problem,

1. It's OK to have multiple user name, and MetaQuotes knew that. Even so, it's better to tell MetaQoutes about your other user name, though they will delete the $ 2 registration bonus credit from that other username ;D. 

2. If there's money involve, MetaQuotes will use user Passport as reference, and show user real name on profile page. The problem for other users is that other users don't know that this user have several user name in mql5.com. 

In real world is OK for everyone to have several unrelated business, and so is the same in mql5.com. Say for example, is OK for me to have and run, Restaurant, Grocery Store, Shoe Shop, Book Store. Of course you never know who own that, except if I name it as phi.nuts_Restaurant, phi.nuts_Grocery Store, phi.nuts_Shoe Shop, phi.nuts_Book Store.

 
NO
 
forexgoshen:
NO
I disagree with you
12
New comment
Reason: