Algorithm Optimisation Championship. - page 120
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
In general, you should add the ability for the topicstarter to make a comment on the very first post in the thread and that would be visible to the date of the last edit comment. That is not to edit the first post, and only give and edit a comment on the first post.
That way the same questions wouldn't arise.
In general, you should add the ability for the topicstarter to make a comment on the very first post in the thread and that would be visible to the date of the last edit comment. That is not to edit the first post, and only give and edit a comment on the first post.
That way the same questions wouldn't arise.
At the moment there is absolutely nothing to add to the first post. Just talk...
That's the problem. Please petition your superiors and put an end to demagoguery, trolling and flooding for good.
Prepare rules, regulations, example codes. Everything should be clear, unambiguous and... glamorous. There's nowhere to call the bosses yet.
The bosses have nothing to do with it. The bosses should be asked to allow the topicstarter (not just me, all topicstarters) to comment on their first post.
ZS. Rules are stipulated, examples of codes and interfaces are shown, scattered in different places. I'll put it all together in one post.
The bosses have nothing to do with it. The bosses should be asked to allow the topicstarter (not just me, all topicstarters) to comment on their first post.
ZS. Rules are stipulated, examples of codes and interfaces are shown, scattered in different places. I'll put it all together in one post.
The first post can only be edited by a moderator. So far there is nothing that can be pasted in the first post. Just talk. No examples, no links to topic disclosures, no codes. All in all 100 pages of flubber.
Added.
There hasn't been a single request to change the first post and add useful information to it.
Karputov Vladimir:
Ochochkie, new rule again....:)
When I first took part in the discussion with the proposal to take into account the accuracy of the calculation, the criterion for selecting a winner was the LOWEST number of references to the FF.
I'll revert back to being a spectator. The rules change like gloves on one hand here!
We'll go around in circles and discuss it until the topicstarter does it the way it should have been from the start.
So you're going to mock him specifically and to the end.
You know, you can certainly think of it as my bullying the topicstarter, but the topicstarter himself periodically mocks the participants, running away from his own championship.
It's as simple as that:
The topicstarter cannot accept the potential possibility that someone will take over and surpass his result.
As soon as such a possibility arises, he changes the rules, does not give the necessary codes, does not comply with the regulations he has established.
If he sees the fact of superiority of the contestant's algorithm, he tries to accuse him of unfairness and discredit him, or to shift the priorities of algorithm evaluation.
Sometimes he leads the discussion into demagoguery, avoiding direct answers to the key questions, mopping them up with distracting posts.
He does not admit mistakes, does not compromise, and maintains a special status which gives him more rights than other participants.
He is overly principled and bordering on stupid.
The main obstacle to the championship is created by the top starter himself.
And this is already his "bullying" of others.