Two accounts at the same firm - page 4
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
Then I'm sorry. Perhaps in order to avoid readers having the same problem understanding the situation, a moderator's comment on the deleted post should be placed in the place of the deleted post ?
And I think the moderators are overreacting. You can't pass off personal emotions as public opinion. All the more so, one should not use one's position to fulfill one's personal emotions. The concept of "willful disrespect" is too elastic to be relied upon. Anyone can interpret it at will.. If there is such a clause in the rules, you have to at least look at whether someone actually took it as a disrespect to his person. And it's a good idea to understand the validity of that. I haven't noticed anyone being offended by disrespect.
Interesting detail. The man is a prankster - he takes that nickname and misspells it, without insulting anyone. Yeah, it's stupid. Yes, infantile. Banned.
Another person - Porter - had no sooner registered on the forum than he immediately proceeds to direct insults. Moderators don't say a word. Is it normal ?
Moderators, your best work is when the atmosphere on the forum is working, free and friendly, relations with each other are human, and moderators are not seen and not heard. But if you are moving around the threads as a group, discussing participants and measures against them, and impersonating the vice squad, then that, sorry, is not the case at all.
Moving to the group on this thread to portray a numerical advantage.
It seems to me that moderators can never be right by definition. Banned Mudreishii for mate, but not banned Porter for being rude - bad. If they had done the opposite, it would have been bad too. And in order to maintain a forum atmosphere, free and friendly communication and human relations with each other, we can not banish in a row all those who have committed violations, we have to choose. If someone considers this choice wrong - and on us there is an enforcement. Appeal procedure.
I just can't understand one thing - are so many mistakes on purpose or is it really possible to write like this?
Judging by the content of his posts - he writes so on purpose. Because a normal person in his right mind and with a normal frame of mind, even with an incomplete education, cannot write with errors of that nature.
Moving to a group on this thread to portray a numerical preponderance.
It seems to me that moderators can never be right by definition. Banning Mudreishii for mate, but not banning Porter for rudeness is bad. If they had done the opposite, it would have been bad too. But in order to maintain a forum atmosphere, free and friendly communication and human relations with each other, we can not banish in a row all who have committed violations, we have to choose. If someone considers this choice wrong - and on us there is an enforcement. Appeal procedure.
By definition, a moderator is always right and his or her actions are non-negotiable.
Hands off the moderators
Hands off the moderators
the forum should have a style of government - anarcho-communo-narchism
Stop it, no one is attacking the moderators. There is a friendly o(b)judgement on the existing moderating practices on the forum.
P.S.
But I'm so quiet on Integer's forum that my own wife is surprised.
I believe that such disrespect (mockery of the Russian language) to accomplices should be banned without further question