Question to the administration of mql5.com - page 33
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
I don't understand the pricing policy of the site, by the way. If you like money so much then why remove what is for sale and why can't the author himself, without restriction, set the price? I've seen so much plagiarism in marquee that even held up at the top of sales. Including their own works that were previously freely available. Only the name was changed. So I was so tempted to lay out the original at a puppy mind you say at $ 1 to discourage such clever people who even the errors in the code to correct did not think it necessary. Suppose you consider it beyond your dignity to splurge on small things. But you have limits on the output. At least 10 bucks. One more thing. One of the papers you deleted is the basis of the strategy of an American trader. He recommends his students who wanted to continue trading on it to buy an indicator on your website. And now? Of course I can write it again, but now I have to change the price. But he wants to buy the copyright on it. There's no such service on the site. They're negotiating now. And what effect will your actions have on their success? What if they fail? What if they publish angry comments about your greed and cavalierness online? Involving all your friends, acquaintances and customers.
P.S. And once again, back to the subject of prices. I am a supporter of the fact that any work should be paid and the author has the right, even if it was just modification of the standard thing, to ask for it, even a small sum of money.
It is better to put the update date in the old place - there you can see when the EA was created and when it was updated.
Indeed, people react differently to "old" developments, not realising that they are updated all the time.
For example: You go into a discussion and see that a version was published, back in 2016.... (I wouldn't have downloaded, thinking it was old technology)
And the point of releasing a new EA so that the publication date is "fresh" ?
I'm against multiplying versions like Expert in1, Expert in2, Expert in3. As some do.
If I log in to mql5.com with my account using my browser and then click the link at the bottom of the Chartshttps://www.mql5.com/ru/charts after about 10 minutes, I get this notification (without changing the IP address of my computer and remaining the same as before). What could be the reason?
It is better to put the update date in the old place - you can see there when the EA was created and when it was updated.
Indeed, people react differently to "old" developments, not realising that they are being updated all the time.
For example: You go into a discussion and see that a version was published, back in 2016.... (I wouldn't have downloaded it thinking it was old technology)
And the point of releasing a new EA so that the publication date is "fresh" ?
I'm against multiplying versions like Expert in1, Expert in2, Expert in3. As some do.
I agree. The new place for update date contradicts the psychology of the user analyzing the product.
Update date should be obligatory next to the version number.
Need to bring it back. Please!
Agreed. The new place for the update date contradicts the psychology of the user analysing the product.
The update date should always be shown next to the version number.
Need to bring it back. Please!
Nothing at all, what new location are we talking about?
I know for a fact that the product was updated, but there's not even an implicit mention of this anywhere. Only the date of publication
Nothing at all, what new location are we talking about?
I know for a fact that the product has been updated, but there's not even a hidden mention of it anywhere. Only the date of publication.
On the home page. But you can't see it there.
Yeah, it was hard to find. Very nicely done, it's never been done before.
Yeah, I had a hard time finding it. Very nicely done, it's never been done before.
Thank you!
The word "Thank you" is obviously meant here in inverted commas (or it will be misunderstood).
The word "Thank you" is obviously meant here in inverted commas (or it will be misunderstood).
Corrected! Implied: "thank you" for replying that I was able to find the update date.