1200 subscribers!!! - page 32

New comment
 
Alexey Kozitsyn:
Yes, of course!

1000 subscribers

300 subscribers

200 subscribers

1500 total.

Dumps account where 1000 subscribers. The service loses -1000 users.

Another option

300 subscribers

300 subscribers

300 subscribers

300 subscribers

300 subscribers

Total of 1,500.

One account with 300 subscribers is drained, Service loses -300 users.

 
Taras Gonchar:
For example, will you promise next time to doubt my words in silence
No, I'll never promise -- I can't doubt in silence -- I need a podium and an audience
 
Sergey Golubev:
You asked me to delete the posts in the branch, where they discuss your signal?
I removed (26 posts), the admins and all the moderators reported.

Now again, and already because of you? Are you sure you know that signaller won't turn?
And you know that they ban for this ...

Discuss in the service desks, or discuss so that "no one understood anything" (so I did not understand for example), or get the approval of the admins (as a moderator here is not the only ...).
I hear you. I apologize for breaking the rules.
If you're banned - all right, I deserved it.
 
Taras Gonchar:
Taras you ignore my posts addressed to you, but still, the question is since you participate here. You would agree if your signal went down in the rating skipping other signals. It went down just because you have more subscribers than anybody else (some kind of antimonopoly filter). But you would remain in first place when sorted by number of subscribers.
 
Marat Khabiev:
You are ignoring my posts addressed to you, but still, the question is, since you are participating here. Would you agree if your signal went down in the rating passing other signals? It went down because you have more subscribers than anybody else (some kind of antimonopoly filter). But you would remain in first place when sorted by number of subscribers.
Nothing of the sort to all the same and transparent conditions Taras did not violate anything we all have a chance. The only way to fight other methods of ranking cheating. As Soros said, all humanity is wrong even if it was right in the beginning. I think traders have learned thoroughly how the rating is formed and use the weaknesses of the service. Issuing signals with drawn history, playing on many accounts, making a bunch of small trades instead of one.
 
Andrey F. Zelinsky:

And by saying "no one cares about Taras' signal" -- this was said in the context of phrases thrown around by you and others like you: "bile", "toad" and others.

Okay. It's hard to explain, it turns out. I tried to put it into different words. But I guess it didn't work. So: "goodbye. I'm done with you."

I see that you are a telepath, even before my response, I realized that I did not understand anything) I hope that during the explanations of health has not undermined, otherwise it would be sad for the community to lose such a "frame". Take care of yourself!

 
Marat Khabiev:
You are ignoring my posts addressed to you, but still, the question is, since you are participating here. Would you agree if your signal went down in the rating passing other signals? It went down because you have more subscribers than anybody else (some kind of antimonopoly filter). But you would remain in first place when sorted by number of subscribers.
Sorry I missed your question.
What kind of nonsense are you asking? -- Is it just because you're in second place?
ask yourself -- you want your rating to go down, but somehow you remain in second place?

Give me a suggestion on how to calculate the rating and I'll tell you what I think about that rating calculation.
I don't know how the rating is counted...maybe it counts perfectly...
I do not know how it counts perfectly ... (it's not just about subscribers ... maybe they do not count at all) ... remember, when I lost part of the story (and subscribers have not changed), my rating dropped ... this was mentioned.

So I have a concrete suggestion:
If you want to specify the maximal drawdown for this month in red brackets next to each month's signal, where the profit for this month is specified.

It's just one thing when the signal has a drawdown once every three years (for example 50%), and another thing when this drawdown is every month.
and their drawdown rates are the same
 
Taras Gonchar:
Sorry I missed your question.
What kind of nonsense are you asking? -- Is it only because you are in second place?
Ask yourself a question -- do you want your rating to go down, but somehow you remain in second place?

Give me a suggestion on how to calculate the rating and I'll tell you what I think about that rating calculation.
I don't know how the rating is counted...maybe it counts perfectly...
I do not know how it counts perfectly... (it's not just subscribers... maybe they do not count at all)... remember, when I lost part of the story (and subscribers have not changed) my rating was falling... this was mentioned.

So I have a concrete suggestion:
If you want to specify the maximal drawdown for this month in red brackets next to each month's signal, where the profit for this month is specified.

It's just one thing when the signal has a drawdown once every three years (for example 50%), and another thing when this drawdown is every month.
and their drawdown rates are the same.
First trade with profit and then without the risk that there is manipulation with the rating, misleading buyers.
 
Marat Khabiev:
What is it well there was no talk about violations on the part of Taras, and the question was addressed to him. And you I asked to write in a personal note about signals with a drawn history, then you yourself have written, answer me in a personal note.
Could you remind your post about the request for a drawn history in a personal note nothing. Maybe I missed something but I don't see your post about the drawing history request.
 
Taras Gonchar:
it's just one thing when a signal got a drawdown once in three years (e.g. 50%), and another thing when this drawdown is every month.
And their drawdown rates are the same

What you're talking about is called a "scam.

The provider first makes risky deals, gets an attractive "growth rate" -- goes to the top, takes subscribers and drastically reduces the risk.

You get "misleading subscribers" -- when people look at your "growth", but there is no such "growth" for a long time.

1...252627282930313233343536373839...230
New comment