Is there a need for a lock in MT5? - page 25
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
The question is this...
Where does it say that this was addressed to SK ?
;)))
Don't stall.Stop . Hands up, show me where SK has the word "harm"
Just don't explain the way his post was transformed in your head into the word "harm".
It's not harm, it's delusion due to misunderstanding, perhaps temporarily
+1:-1
Just to be fair, I'll tell you where I see the spectre of the word harm.
Any action can have the attribute of usefulness in three states: "useful", "useless", "harmful".
The phrase "don't mislead novice traders" is not uttered to shake the air/forum, but for a specific reason.
Consider the attribute of usefulness in relation to the action of "misleading":
1. do not mislead novice traders because it is useful.
2. do not mislead novice traders because it is useless.
3. don't mislead novice traders, because it's harmful.
The first option inverts the logic of locophobes and is therefore considered wrong, inconsistent with the motivation.
The second option does not contradict anything. Admittedly, it is not clear on what basis the action of "misleading" is prohibited. The phrase itself is useless in such a context.
Assuming that the phrase is still based on a meaningful and useful motive, the third option remains.
All this work of parsing the semantics of the phrase and motive is done automatically by almost everyone's brain.
.
I believe that although the word 'harm' was not mentioned - it was implied.
Just to be fair, I'll tell you where I see the spectre of the word 'harm'.
Any action can have the attribute of usefulness in three states: "useful", "useless", "harmful".
The phrase "don't mislead novice traders" is not uttered to shake the air/forum, but for a specific reason.
Consider the attribute of usefulness in relation to the action of "misleading":
1. do not mislead novice traders because it is useful.
2. do not mislead novice traders because it is useless.
3. don't mislead novice traders, because it's harmful.
The first option inverts the logic of locophobes and is therefore considered wrong, inconsistent with the motivation.
The second option does not contradict anything. Admittedly, it is not clear on what basis the action of "misleading" is prohibited. The phrase itself is useless in this context.
Assuming that the phrase is still based on a meaningful and useful motive, the third option remains.
All this work of parsing the semantics of the phrase and motive is done automatically by almost everyone's brain.
.
I believe that although the word 'harm' was not mentioned - it was implied.
Thank you
Thank you for not inserting a wikipedia quote on the word harm and doing a full linguistic analysis with a laporoscopy
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Imagine a bunch of people go to a racetrack and bet.
some of them clap their hands three times and shout "cuckoo" twice.
As of the first of the month, the hippodrome has forbidden clapping and crowing.
and there are crowds of outraged people with placards saying "violation of the constitution" "down with the racetrack dictatorship" "violation of human rights" but most of all with placards saying "we can't win now" "we were deliberately robbed of our livelihood"
"the cursed racetrack found out about our way of playing error-free and banned us."
And the racecourse is just for.... the cuckooing
Imagine a bunch of people going to a racetrack and placing bets.
Some of them clap their hands three times and shout "cuckoo" twice.
As of the first of the month, the hippodrome has forbidden clapping and crowing.
and there are crowds of outraged people with placards saying "violation of the constitution" "down with the racetrack dictatorship" "violation of human rights" but most of all with placards saying "we can't win now" "we have been deliberately deprived of our earnings"
"the goddamn racetrack found out about our way to make no mistakes and banned us."
And the hippodrome is just for.... fuckin' cacklin'.
What's the point?
The ruling of one private office in just one country in the world,
as well as the decisions of some dealerships and the personal opinions of individual traders
that LOC is Evil
It means absolutely nothing, apart from the opinion of a group of individuals.
Just like the lockers...
And what do you mean by "don't stall"?
I`m not herding cows and riding a fox on a bike...
The post by the esteemed SK was an impetus to address the people with his opinion on the subject matter.
One speaker replaced the other at the podium, that's why the score is 0-0, none of us brought anything definite to the table...
Thank you
Thank you for not inserting a wikipedia quote on the word harm and doing a full linguistic analysis with laporoscopy
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Imagine a bunch of people go to a racetrack and bet.
some of them clap their hands three times and shout "cuckoo" twice.
As of the first of the month, the hippodrome has forbidden clapping and crowing.
and there are crowds of outraged people with placards saying "violation of the constitution" "down with the racetrack dictatorship" "violation of human rights" but most of all with placards saying "we can't win now" "we were deliberately robbed of our livelihood"
"the goddamn racetrack found out about our way of playing error-free and banned us."
And the racetrack is just fucking cuckooing.
Are we going to argue like children and give each other endless examples?
Will you stop it?
I have never claimed that lock is a source of income. I see locke as a tool that helps "not to confuse the sinful with the righteous". I'm in favour of lock only because it solves the problem of multiple EAs working simultaneously on one currency pair.
Here is my example: netposition is the first step, but not the last. Let's mentally take the next step and see how you like it. You will find yourself in the same situation as the locs supporters find themselves in now. Or maybe you will like this step?
Suppose netposition won out five to ten years ago. Loki is long in the past. MK is releasing a new MT6 terminal which prohibits separate positions on different currency pairs. Now the HyperNettoPosition is total margin instead of separate positions on different currency pairs. You no longer see the structure of the position, which currency pairs it consists of, but only the total margin and total profit/loss for the entire position. You have an offer to redo all of your EAs.
Now it's interesting to hear your attitude towards this change.
Well, I couldn't resist.
So what's the point?
The rash of one private office in just one country in the world,
as well as the decisions of some dealers, as well as the personal opinions of individual traders
that LOC is Evil.
It means absolutely nothing apart from the opinion of a group of individuals.
Just like the lockers...
And what do you mean by "don't stall"?
I`m not herding cows and riding a fox on a bike...
The post by the esteemed SK was an impetus to reach out to the people with his opinion on the subject of the thread.
One speaker replaced the other on the podium, that's why the score is 0-0 that none of us brought anything definite to the table ...
Locke is not evil but just nonsense.
You can't put your words in your opponent's mouth when posting in "reply" mode
But none of that matters ...
there is no argument between the "opponents" of locke and its supporters
is there a question of whether cuckooing and clapping is necessary or can we do without it and concentrate on choosing a horse
Will you stop?
You do not want (not can) understand that our problems (e.g. accounting structure) are our problems only, we do not need our problems
and all these social-union requests .........
You understand the nonsense of loco as a source of profit, it's just more convenient for you to keep records - don't ask anyone for anything, don't scare or strike, take the time to readjust
Probably enough................
Imagine a bunch of people going to a racetrack and placing bets.
Some of them clap their hands three times and shout "cuckoo" twice.
As of the first of the month, the hippodrome has forbidden clapping and crowing.
and there are crowds of outraged people with placards saying "violation of the constitution" "down with the racetrack dictatorship" "violation of human rights" but most of all with placards saying "we can't win now" "we were deliberately robbed of our livelihood"
"the goddamn racetrack found out about our way of playing error-free and banned us."
And the racetrack's just cuckooing for....
Don't worry, in real life another racetrack will immediately open up nearby, where you can cluck all you want. Besides, what do you mean by annoying? Set up a program on the server once and rest. And a computer doesn't care what it counts, it's iron.
You do not want (not can) understand that our problems (e.g. accounting structure) are our problems only, we do not give a damn about our problems
and all these public union requests .........
You know, at first the MKs flatly refused to allow MT5 indicators to manage objects in the window. But common sense prevailed and it was implemented.
By the way, I see my own contribution to this result and my opinion played an important role.
Water won't flow under a lying stone.
The purpose of the raised wave of indignation of the lockers is to achieve the return of the locks either in pure form, or in a virtual position structure with support on the server. And in that goal I support the lockers.
But the strange thing is... People who don't need locks are passionately trying to prove that locks are fundamentally unnecessary, without going into the goals of lockers. It's as if locs will be supported by MT5 (where it's possible), then they, the opponents of locs, won't be able to use this MT5. And that's why they are categorically against locs!
You know, at first the MCs flatly refused to allow MT5 indicators to control objects in the window. But common sense prevailed and it was implemented.
By the way, I see my own contribution to this result, and my opinion played an important role.
Water won't flow under a lying stone.
The purpose of the raised wave of indignation of the lockers is to achieve the return of the locks either in pure form, or in a virtual position structure with support on the server. And in that goal I support the lockers.
But the strange thing is... People who don't need loks passionately try to prove that the loks are unnecessary, without going into the goals of the lockers. It's as if locs will be supported by MT5 (where it's possible), then they, the opponents of locos, won't be able to use this MT5. And that's why they are categorically against locs!
No ! NO ! NO !no "opponents" of locs !
Did you ever, before the talk about mt5 and the NFA decisions, read that someone from the mt4 users asked to change the terminal to avoid the possibility of locks ?
you can't compare lock requests and history with mt5 indicators
You can't compare lock requests with the history on mt5 indicators.
There are several categories that need the lock as it is in mt4
For example -
i think you do not have a problem with scalping (not the night crosses but EURUSD), everybody has gone through scalping, the shorter the target the higher the probability of prediction, one problem - DTs do not like it
If you take your pipsitter with 5-9 pips, add locking and you have a different size in the profit, the time of holding is longer and you have something to get hold of with the DT
You may ask a question: is it a hobby or business?
Spoknight