Phi.nuts come out here in the open!!! - page 3

New comment
 
OMG tonny still spamming xD
 
And what criteria did they use to judge that its my site or im still with them all other people have posted never heard before that might as well be theres and even in the past we have seen even big sites spam and advertise and its this kind of selective application of rules where im usually the only one targeted that i suspect some conspiracy. If the rule says no links then it should apply to everyone and the poll itself is a violation but since the poster is friends with admin no action has been taken and this is what im talking about and now im reconsidering my position on phi.nuts is this our so called admins?
 
The rule says no links meaning no links except those to mql4/mql5 site wether you own the end page/site or not i can post a link to a famous site that i dont own but be still be promoting my own interests like an affiliate link or maybe be using a shortened url to redirect elsewhere and i challenge you to stand right here and tell me why the poll and other comments are not violations if you have balls.
 
tonny:
And what criteria did they use to judge that its my site or im still with them . . . .

The rules are here:  https://www.mql5.com/en/auth_register

In particular:  5. Posting of advertising messages, spamming and flooding are forbidden. 

Your MQL5 Profile says:  "Works:  Programmer at FxAutomated.com"  your MQL4 profile says: "Registration date january 2010 http://www.fxautomated.com"  so it's a reasonable assumption that you have a direct connection with that site.

 

If someone starts a poll "which broker do you prefer?" then people comment links to their favourite brokers. Wont that poll itself and comments be violating this rule irrespective of wether or not they own the site? Come on admit it already because ive seen people warned for just asking questions about external site/broker. Then someone asks about the best forex site not related to the mql programing sites people post links to external sites which we dont know if its theirs, their grandpas or their great grandmas and only one person gets banned in a poll that itself is off mql topic in the first place.

Here is what the rules say i helped you fetch it in full since you are trying to throw off the actual topic by bringing in my old advertising issue ive highlighted the ones that apply here based on their weight in the matter:

Rules

  1. Please, be polite communicating in this forum. Any posts which may offend other visitors of the forum are forbidden. (Has whroeder or devries ever been warned?)
  2. Discussions of any banking, brokerage or other financial companies or institutions are prohibited. Such messages are subject to removal.(nowhere that says its only violation if you are the owner of the site behind the link )
  3. Any discussions about personal relations between the participants of the forum are forbidden.
  4. Any use of obscene expressions is forbidden.
  5. Posting of advertising messages, spamming and flooding are forbidden.
  6. Numerous breakings of rules, ignoring moderators' remarks and furthermore open disrespect for administration will result in banning from the forum without any explanations.
  7. The administration has the right to change these rules if necessary.

Rule 2 is apparently the one that banned me and i see nowhere that says its only violation if you are the owner of the site behind the link to give the greenlight to the other comments and the poll(https://www.mql5.com/en/forum/6799) itself. You tell me and anyone who sees this judge for yourself. Goodluck and this post is closed.

 
tonny:


Rules

5.  Posting of advertising messages, spamming and flooding are forbidden.

 

Rule 2 is apparently the one that banned me and i see nowhere that says its only violation if you are the owner of the site behind the link to give the greenlight to the other comments and the poll(https://www.mql5.com/en/forum/6799) itself. You tell me and anyone who sees this judge for yourself. Goodluck and this post is closed.

I think it was probably rule 5,  as I already mentioned.  Yes,  this thread is closed.

 

Just been doin' the usual routine forum checks and then all of a sudden, this pops up,"Phi.nuts come out here in the open!!!" HAHAHA! ;)

No disrespect intended to you, tonny or any member who posted to this thread. I just didn't expect to read, "Phi.nuts come out here in the open!!!" as a title for a thread.


It seems tonny wants access to his account and moderators don't want tonny to not have access to his account.

Maybe there's a diplomatic proposition for you all to possibly consider?


Moderators: Give terms to tonny to allow him to now have access to his account.

tonny: Accept terms given to you by moderators to now have access to your account.


You'll all get what you want. Can't this be handled with civility?


Thank you

123
New comment
Reason: