Blog FAQ - page 38

[Vladimir Karputov]

zaskok:

What accusations are we talking about?!

Even reread it.

In that case, you know about clause 4... It's a resource rule. If you have a valid opinion or suggestion, write to Service Desk.

[Yury Reshetov]

zaskok:

It is not acceptable to criticise the developers or anything else (including the mood of the developers).

It is possible, but it must be done sensibly:

1. If a software glitch is detected, it is more appropriate to report it to Service Desk than to make a fuss about it. Because the Service Desk is designed for this purpose, in contrast to blogs.
2. If the criticism is constructive, i.e. not just pointing fingers at this or that misunderstanding, but offering your own solution to the problem, then the developers respond more appropriately.
3. If any functionality is missing in the software, there is no need to try to impose it on the developers immediately. If you do not impose this functionality but offer it, it may be added some time later. And this only depends on how much demand for it there is. The point is that the work on the MQL5 functionality is incomplete and is constantly being improved. Therefore, a rapid result is unlikely to be obtained: in addition to the fact that something new needs to be added to the software, it must be thoroughly tested and accompanied by sensible documentation. And this is not as easy as some would like it to be.
   

[[Deleted]]

barabashkakvn:
In that case be aware of clause 4... This is the rule of the resource. If you have a valid opinion or suggestion - write to the Service Desk.

Please don't get bogged down in the subject and don't reduce the rules to formalism. There are unwritten rules and almost all Form residents will confirm this. It's not about relaxations, changes and dissatisfaction. I am interested in the answer of the administration or those who know for sure, to a simple question:

zaskok:
There are very strong restrictions on the forum from the developers, what you can write and what you can't - ban. And these restrictions are much stronger than the legal ones.

In particular, you may not discuss in any form any competitors of the developers and give links to them. You cannot discuss particular signals and Market products. Brokers may not be discussed. No links to resources disliked by the developers. No criticism of developers, etc. (including the mood of the developers).

Do these extra developer restrictions also apply in blogs? Or is freedom in blogs, unlike in the forum, restricted only by the legal framework (mat, violence, hatred, porn, etc.)?

So as not to be unsubstantiated, I'll give you an example of a rule violation. All it takes is a link to a constructive discussion of some trading topic, but located in another community, and deletion of the post will follow, at the very least. I have no objection to such unwritten rules. I want to be clear about blogs. It seems that blogs are usually positioned as something of their own and therefore there may be relaxations in the rules. So I'm asking, are they or aren't they?

[Yury Reshetov]

zaskok:

...

So as not to be unsubstantiated, I'll give you an example of a rule violation. All it takes is a link to a constructive discussion of some trading topic, but located in another community, and the post will be deleted, at the very least.

Blogs have a field called "Source" for reposting from other resources. In such a case the idea is not to discuss (no need to pull someone else's blanket over oneself) but to make the blogger acquaint his readers and subscribers with something that is of interest to him.

[[Deleted]]

I want to know if I can have the same freedom of action in MQL5-blogs as I have in other blogs: LiveJournal, Blogspot, etc.? Of course, without explicit advertising and on trading topics only.

For example, am I allowed to discuss in blogs

• Specific Signals or specific third party monitors. Compare monitors and criticise them?
• Compare Signal Services and criticise them?
• Discuss PAMMs.
• Discuss specific Expert Advisors (on the web) and market products?
• Provide links to other resources with interesting discussions, but which are indirectly competing with the developers?
• Discuss other platforms, compare them with MT? Provide links to specific implementations, criticism and suggestions?
• Showing the weaknesses of MT and showing other solutions?
• Show the pros and cons of brokers?

In general, it is necessary to behave freely, within the framework of the trading theme, without unambiguous advertising and respecting the law? And only in blogs.

[---]

zaskok:

For example, can I blog about:

• Specific Signals or specific third party monitors. Compare monitors and criticise them?
• Compare Signal Services and criticize them?
• Discuss PAMMs.
• Discuss specific Expert Advisors (on the web) and market products?
• Provide links to other resources with interesting discussions, but which are indirectly competing with the developers?
• Discuss other platforms, compare them with MT? Provide links to specific implementations, criticism and suggestions?
• Showing the weaknesses of MT and showing other solutions?
• Show the pros and cons of brokers?

You have answered your own question.

Please don't reduce the rules to formalism. We have unwritten rules and almost all Forex brokers will confirm it.

So no one will respond to your attempts to formalise the rules.

[[Deleted]]

sergeev:

so no one will respond to your attempts to formalise the rules.

Thank you, you don't know. That's fine. But it would be better if all the uninformed, apart from the administration, did not report it, so as not to bog down a seemingly simple and concrete topic. It would be interesting to hear the opinion of the administration.

I would really hate to write a blog comment or post and then find it deleted, changed or banned (I've dealt with all that already). Here's a question, for example. I don't know if I can answer publicly.

[Renat Fatkhullin]

You have "can discuss specific competitors/brokers" surrounded by innocuous questions about products etc.

Brokers can run corporate blogs and publish their news in special blog sections as well as on their profiles. We do not allow discussion of brokers (pros / cons), otherwise, after a month, the resource would be a battlefield all-against-all with a bottomless aggression on the one hand and marketing budgets on the other.

If you want to help on developments/competitors, it's better to do it in the forum and servicedesk. Where it's close to the developers.

Some resources are severely banned for the amount of damage done to us. For hacking our software, protocols, for lying publicly etc. Attitudes towards them will not change.

The main principle in assessing materials is whether or not they have turned into advertising or sabotage? That is, it is not formal rules with lots of loopholes that govern, but cumulative evaluation.

Be sure to keep in mind that there are so many responsibilities (including criminal responsibility, which varies from country to country, as well as subsidiary responsibility) currently attached to the public sphere on the Internet that serious resources cannot be left unmoderated.

[[Deleted]]

Renat:

You "can discuss specific competitors/brokers" surrounded by innocuous questions about products etc.

I don't want to pry into other people's houses. I have no desire to discuss brokers yet. I got banned and had my thread taken down for a harmless discussion of just a product. And I've seen people get banned for innocuous mentioning of even the names of third-party monitors. There's no desire to get banned again on the forum. Can I do harmless things on blogs? For example, can I publicly write an answer to this question on the same blog there? And when do I cross the line by answering innocuous questions specifically?

If you want to help on developments/competitors, it's better to do it in the forum and servicedesk. Where it's close to the developers.

It's silly (won't change anything, and will only make you angry) to write in the service-desk or forum about the order-log. But in the blog it is possible to show the usefulness or uselessness of this action.

Some resources are severely banned for the amount of damage they do to us. For hacking our software, protocols, for lying to the public and so on. Attitudes towards them will not change.

Yes, the same smartlab is banned as understood. Even giving a link to the rarely-reasonable there will be deleted. Thanks for clarifying.

The main principle of evaluating materials - have they turned into advertisement or pest or not? That is, it is not formal rules with lots of loopholes that govern, but cumulative evaluation.

Be sure to keep in mind that there are so many responsibilities (including criminal responsibility, which varies from country to country, as well as subsidiary responsibility) currently attached to the public sphere on the Internet that serious resources cannot be left unmoderated.

That's why I mentioned that it's mandatory to comply with the law and to stick to the trading theme.

[Renat Fatkhullin]

You've made up a lot about bans, without understanding the point and thinking that some comment is the reason for the ban. A common situation: a person wrote 5 comments, a couple of them were deleted for outright sabotage, and the rest thought it was a reaction to a perfectly normal 3 posts.

No smartlab is banned, don't assume by default that we have some severe restrictions. We treat links with love, we suggest (a method of extracting meta-information from links), we design them properly and we try to make them useful.