Why are there so few experts in the MQL5 database? - page 14
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
I don't mind... it's fine... I just need to fix the kinks...
MQL5 vs MQL4 - it's heaven and earth )) I had to use mq4 the other day ... I am ready to accept bugs in beta versions of MT5)))
Give the developers another half year and ... Everything will be fine!
But do not wait for peace of mind: If you want a super-product, you will get tons of complaints ))))
Instead of drooling, go to the Automated Trading Championship 2010 page:
I did. There are only 10 weeks left, but we do not see any real EAs. This is a worrying symptom.
The registration figures do not mean anything at all since it does not cost anything to register - this is why people register for free. Want, I also click on the bar "Confirm registration", and the number will grow even more - that you will be happy with the growth of this figure. But I don't have anything except an EA from MT5 delivery, just like 95% of those who have already clicked. Here we are going to compete...
I did. Only 10 weeks to go and no real councillors in sight. It is an alarming symptom.
The registration numbers don't mean anything at all, because it costs nothing to register - that's why people go for free. Want, I also click on the bar "Confirm registration", and the number will grow even more - that you will be happy with the growth of this figure. But I don't have anything except an EA from MT5 delivery, just like 95% of those who have already clicked. Now we are going to compete...
This is our fourth championship - registration is clearly more active than in previous years.
300 of ~700 have already confirmed their personal data and started uploading Expert Advisors. Next week we'll start automatic tests of the Expert Advisors they've submitted.
There are still 70 days to go - it's time to write and test your EA, not to bet "this is a failure, it won't work". It's funny to see how some people try to spit on the well-tuned flywheel of our processes.
There are still 70 days ahead - a good time to write and test your expert, rather than betting "this is a failure, it won't work". It is ridiculous to watch some people trying to spit on the well-tuned flywheel of our processes.
As always, it all comes down to definitions: what is "failure" and what is "nothing".
It is unequivocal that there will be participants. Those who argue are blatantly stupid. There are EAs - two are in delivery and there are three more in the articles. Registration doesn't cost anything. Potentially a good score. Chances of success are small, but when has that ever stopped lovers of freebies? I've already suggested how to increase the number of participants - to add a couple of Expert Advisors with an increased number of customizable parameters to the terminal. Also, we may slightly reduce vigilance on double registrations, and we will have as many participants as we need.
If this is a criterion for success, we don't even need to start the championship - we can consider it a success and once again demonstrate the ever-growing ... what you would like others to think it has demonstrated.
I don't suppose you are capable of writing an expert?
What are you even doing here? Your posts show: whining about failures, not wanting to write, happily participating and fuelling topics about brokers and trying to kick Metacvots every chance you get.
The answer is clear - just whining and shitting quietly.
I don't suppose you are capable of writing an expert?
What are you even doing here? Your posts show: whining about failures, not wanting to write, happily participating and fuelling topics about brokers and trying to kick Metacvots every chance you get.
The answer is clear - just whining and shitting quietly.
I don't suppose you are capable of writing an expert?
What are you even doing here? Your posts show: whining about failures, not wanting to write, happily participating and fuelling topics about brokers and trying to kick Metacvots every chance you get.
The answer is clear - just whining and shitting quietly.
Where did I whine about failures? You have me confused with someone else. On the contrary, I'm full of optimism.
I cannot write an Expert Advisor in MQL5, perhaps not yet.
I'm not warming up the topics about brokers, but I'm explaining the situation as it is. I`m not an expert, I`m just an expert in MQL5, because I know about it and many people do not know. That's just the way it is. There was no discussion of specific brokers in the deleted thread, but there was a conversation about financial markets. It is not clear why the thread was deleted.
About methaquotes kicking is just a lie, methaquotes I have always and everywhere defended from lies and misunderstanding, but criticized when the company really deserved it.
It is very convenient to boor and crap on petty things when you have a modem in your hands.
Where did I whine about failures? You have me confused with someone else here. On the contrary, I am full of optimism.
Apparently, you think you are very careful with your choice of words:
Figures of registration does not mean anything at all, because it costs nothing to register - so people are dumping for free. Want, I also click on the bar "Confirm registration", and the figure will grow even more - that you will be happy with the growth of this figure.
It is certain that there will be participants. Those who argue are blatantly stupid. There are EAs - two are in delivery and there are three more in the articles. Registration doesn't cost anything. Potentially a good score. Chances of success are small, but when has that ever stopped lovers of freebies? I've already suggested how to increase the number of participants - to add a couple of Expert Advisors with an increased number of adjustable parameters to the terminal. Also, we can slightly reduce vigilance against double registrations, and we will have as many participants as we need.
But you shouldn't be surprised by the results of exceeding the threshold.
Apparently, you think you are very careful in your choice of expression:
But you shouldn't be surprised at the results of exceeding the threshold.