Working together - page 2
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
Hi,
What's the casting?
Are you accepting boozers?
Are you serious? Please read and give your opinion on all points ))
---
100 grams of Russian vodka replaces an hour of meditation, and after half a litre all the chakras open and the third eye begins to see every woman as a beauty.
I don't agree at all - a good team can achieve much more than a loner.
A good team can, but you can't get it together here. Trading is a field where everyone has their own secrets for making money, which no one wants to share with anyone.
A good team can, but you can't get it together here. Trading is a field where everyone has their own secrets for making money, which no one wants to share with anyone.
A good team can, but you can't get it together here. Trading is a field where everyone has their own secrets for making money, which no one wants to share with anyone.
Trader in the trade makes forecasts and is responsible for the correctness of his predictions with money.
To build a team you need a leader who takes responsibility for his decisions with his own money.
A programmer will write, a mathematician will propose an idea, an architect will design a fish, but if the leader does not organize the work, nothing will happen.
And why actually should all these people do any work? Why will they do it this way and not the other way? Because the leader said so.
If he's wrong, you don't lose anything. If he is right, you have done an important thing (profit for both sides).
So you are absolutely right, you cannot build a good team for free.
Free of charge is my insertion, but the thread as it hints.
As an option for free is open projects where anyone, absolutely free of charge, can correct something to complement.
The fact that there are many examples of open source projects, but they are all a little bit not about the vested interests of making money on Forex.
The main idea is to use the free privateness of the forex broker, to get a free fix for the first time. Well, where is it (in this phrase), looting money on handicrafts?
All the same, all that revolves around, and somehow breathes on this resource, revolves around a button "GIFT".
All the aspirations and ambitions to buy, write, download, that, what you run has a red button "Download BILL" even download the word redundant simply "BILL", the intuitive interface means once written money, then you need to press.
Hence the morals, the opensource won't take root on Fore (imho).
A trader in trade makes predictions and is responsible for the accuracy of his predictions with his money.
In order to assemble a team, you need a leader who is responsible with his money for the decisions made.
A programmer will write, a mathematician will propose an idea, an architect will design a fish, but if the leader does not organize the work, nothing will go right.
And why actually should all these people do any work? Why will they do it this way and not the other way? Because the leader said so.
If he's wrong, you don't lose anything. If he is right, you have done an important thing (profit for both sides).
So you are absolutely right, you cannot build a good team for free.
Free of charge is my insertion, but the thread as it hints.
As an option for free is open projects where anyone, absolutely free of charge, can correct something to complement.
The fact that there are many examples of open source projects, but they are all a little bit not about the vested interests of making money on Forex.
The main idea is to use the free privateness of the forex broker, to get a free fix for the first time. Well, where is it (in this phrase), looting money on handicrafts?
All the same, all that revolves around, and somehow breathes on this resource, revolves around a button "GIFT".
All the aspirations and ambitions to buy, write, download, that, what you run has a red button "Download BILL" even download the word redundant simply "BILL", the intuitive interface means once written money, then you need to press.
Hence the moral, oppensors on the forex will not take root (imho).
+1
Well put.
A trader in trade makes predictions and is responsible for the accuracy of his predictions with his money.
In order to assemble a team, you need a leader who is responsible with his money for the decisions made.
A programmer will write, a mathematician will propose an idea, an architect will design a fish, but if the leader does not organize the work, nothing will go right.
And why actually should all these people do any work? Why will they do it this way and not the other way? Because the leader said so.
If he's wrong, you don't lose anything. If he is right, you have done an important thing (profit for both sides).
So you are absolutely right, you cannot build a good team for free.
Free of charge is my insertion, but the thread as it hints.
As an option for free is open projects where anyone, absolutely free of charge, can correct something to complement.
The fact that there are many examples of open source projects, but they are all a little bit not about the vested interests of making money on Forex.
The main idea is to use the free privateness of the forex broker, to get a free fix for the first time. Well, where is it (in this phrase), looting money on handicrafts?
All the same, all that revolves around, and somehow breathes on this resource, revolves around a button "GIFT".
All the aspirations and ambitions to buy, write, download, that, what you run has a red button "Download BILL" even download the word redundant simply "BILL", the intuitive interface means once written money, then you need to press.
Hence the moral, oppensorsors will not get accustomed to forex (imho).
98% true.
But there is a minor nuance here - the organiser of an effective "movement" (in Opsense and other publishers) is often a third party.
But in the local area, everyone is carefully excluded except programmers and the occasional trader.
(To be fair: in the angl. branch there are sort of "journalists-as-usual")
There are no speculators here (on ideas/goods/products/signals) so there is no market. Because the market is formed from overselling.
Current business practitioners are quite adept at profiting from related or sideline freesources, interest meetings and other "pale young men with burning eyes" :-)
My suggestion is not to mix a cooperative with a limited company.
If the team is made as a cooperative, there will be collective decisions on every sneeze, which will complicate the process of getting to a certain point, but may make getting to the right point quicker. A cooperative is relevant when participants have similar skills/knowledge but different experiences, then having voices in decision making accumulates experience. Within such a team, there can be different responsibilities that benefit all members of the cooperative.
If we have a limited liability company, then this is where the decision has to be made solely by the leader, such a team will move quickly to set points, but it is less likely that these points are correct than in a cooperative. In such a team it is possible to have employees hired to perform certain functions, responsible for their remuneration.
Working with capital, I think, can take many forms, from stockpiling members' shares, to contributing to the team's infrastructure (premises/communications/representational costs). I'm more interested in infrastructure funding, as the costs are transparent and I make my own decisions on how to use the achievements of the team.
To unite people who have their own ideas, it is possible to agree on a schedule of work on the ideas of each team member, for example, the first month we scratch diligently the idea of the first participant, the second month the idea of the second participant. I.e. we have a list of ideas/directions on which to work, and the order can be made random (pull a piece of paper out of a hat) in the first phase. After working through the ideas, we look at what the results have been, draw new vectors of movement, discuss deadlines and priorities, and so on in a circle until we come across a gold mine.
The point of the team is precisely to accelerate the research work, not to divide responsibilities and rewards.
A controversial point... To create a team you need motivation for all its members. In this case, creating a team is quite realistic...
TC-anonymous has long since dropped out, and you're still arguing )) Ok, I will speak out of sporting interest
Has anyone here besides me ever worked in programming teams, even if not trading? I think very few.
At my last job I was a project manager, a team of 5 to 10 people, almost all in one office.
It was a hell of a job to coordinate the work of the team, to set tasks for each person based on their level, to watch the code, etc. That is, you can't do without a manager.
On the pre-previous team was Russia - USA - China. Immediately increasing difficulty by an order of magnitude, code synchronization, as I write the code, in the U.S. asleep. How to throw on the server? Suddenly, I screw up someone else's, and such moments of the blitz are constant. Well, we solved this issue
somehow. Thank God the manager was in the states, not me. And there was a clear plan of what had to be done.
So just the technical part is already a big problem.