imitation hand trading - page 3

New comment
 
Alexey Volchanskiy:

What does this have to do with the user agreement? It says that the user, i.e. the programmer, undertakes not to modify the terminal.

Do you understand at all what we are talking about? Let me explain - who compiles the versions of the terminal for different DCs.

Excuse me, but isn't"user, i.e. programmer" a misnomer?

For example, I am not programmer. But a user, or more specifically a trader.

 
алексей мишарин:

Excuse me, but isn't"user, i.e. programmer" a misnomer?

For example, I am not a programmer. But a user, well, or more specifically a trader.

Of course)) I meant me in a hurry ))
 
Alexey Volchanskiy:
Of course it is)) I'm talking about me in a hurry ))

Thanks, and (sorry for being boring) I will also try to return to the TC's post, who complained that the order opened in the other direction (instead of SELL it opened BUY and vice versa) . Because he probably is not quite a programmer either. Is it OK that I'm like this?

 
Strange that no one has answered? My question is interesting, I too have brokers who are stuck on EAs and don't let them trade.
 
yerlan Imangeldinov:
It's strange, why hasn't anyone answered? It's an interesting question, I too have brokers who are stalling on EAs, they won't let me trade them.
Usually, if an order is opened by an EA or a script, it can be given a "magic number". This is a number used by the Expert Advisor to distinguish its positions from positions opened by someone else. The "magic number" cannot be set manually when opening an order. The conclusion is that if the terminal does not send to the server any distinctive sign when opening an order, by whom the EA opened the position or not, then if "magic number" is not specified, then it is impossible to find out who has sent the order to open the position - EA or trader. However, if you use several Expert Advisors in your work or if you work manually as well. If you do not specify "magik", then EAs will confuse their orders with other EAs' orders.
 
Vitalii Ananev:
If the order is opened by an EA or a script, you can usually set a "magic number" for it. This is a number used by the Expert Advisor to distinguish its positions from those opened by someone else. The "magic number" cannot be set manually when opening an order. The conclusion is that if the terminal does not send to the server any distinctive sign when opening an order, by whom the EA opened the position or not, then if "magic number" is not specified, then it is impossible to find out who has sent the order to open the position - EA or trader. However, if you use several Expert Advisors in your work or if you work manually as well. If you do not specify "magik", then EAs will confuse their orders with other EAs' orders.

Also, in the detailed report it still says who set the order, Expert Advisor or hand

 
Vladislav Andruschenko:

Also, the itemised report still says who set the order, the expert or the hand

So, Metatrader marks the orders somehow, and then there is no way to hide the information about who opened the position from the broker.
 
Vitalii Ananev:
and then there is no way to hide the information about who opened the position from the broker
What do you mean you CANNOT DISCLOSE? Does it mean that there are some rules in trading that force to hide the use of Expert Advisors, bots, scripts, and other developments included in the concept of "Forex experts, trading robots and advisors"?
 
алексей мишарин:
What do you mean, you can't hide it? Does this mean that there are some rules in trading that force to hide the use of EAs, bots, scripts, and other developments included in the concept of "Forex Experts, Trading Robots and Expert Advisors"?
Of course YES. For example, there are contests for manual trading, there are brokers who give some money for trading with a condition that it will be hands-on only.
 
Alexey Viktorov:
Of course YES. For example, there are contests for manual trading, there are brokers providing a certain amount of money for trading with the condition that trading will be manual only.
Then the question arises: can it be argued that the MT participated in the contest for hand trading - but tried to cheat the system by creating the appearance of fair trading? (Without knowing that this would all be reflected in the MT stats)
123456789
New comment