Should moderators be compelled to link their trading activity to signals as some sort of vetting process to root out fake advice?

Alain Verleyen 2013.05.15 17:58 #21

tonny:
yay yes is winning!

LOL

Mirza Baig 2013.05.15 19:35 #22

:p

Tonny Obare 2013.05.16 06:38 #23

Must be moderators voting for no

Alain Verleyen 2013.05.16 06:45 #24

tonny:
Must be moderators voting for no

I voted neutral.

Ovidiu Caslariu 2014.01.07 19:06 #25

Even if might not be the responsibility of moderators would be nice to have a Verified status for the signals upon some criteria. That would help a lot in evaluating a signal.

Tonny Obare 2014.01.07 21:03 #26

MetaSky:

Even if might not be the responsibility of moderators would be nice to have a Verified status for the signals upon some criteria. That would help a lot in evaluating a signal.

You might wana explain more because currently there is the live/demo source account identification system that i think is great and also i dont believe its possible to easily send signals from an account that isnt ones.

Is it possible to Frequently Asked Questions about Signing up for more

Engin Topcuoglu 2014.01.07 21:09 #27

MetaSky:

Even if might not be the responsibility of moderators would be nice to have a Verified status for the signals upon some criteria. That would help a lot in evaluating a signal.

yes!

Tonny Obare 2014.01.08 04:34 #28

Surely his interest cant just be the word "verified" because if you have ever set up a signal then you should know that verification exists.

Should moderators be compelled to link their trading activity to signals as some sort of vetting process to root out fake advice? - page 3