QUESTION TO THE MODERATORS - page 4
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
useless... Flood, dummies and sellers are an integral part of tech analysis...
Wenn ich das Wort "TA" hore, entsichere ich meinen Browning!!!
To shoot off the floodoodoodlers, teabaggers and salesmen! >> get in the way, you know, of the subject.
No, seriously - you're right - it's useless. They're like a grindhouse - deathproof))) Tested thousands of times on hundreds of forums...
But here's a question: what if we entrust moderator rights to trusted users? Well, not a moderator, but a smaller one, say, the ability to only delete topics like "sell EA"? What do you think?
here is your answer : (question)
Wouldn't that take the bread away from the honourable moderators? - but this one is rhetorical.
Wenn ich das Wort "TA" hore, entsichere ich meinen Browning!!!
To shoot the floodooders, the teabaggers and the salesmen! Getting in the way, you know, of the subject conversation!
No, seriously - you're right - it's useless. They are like in a grindhouse - dethproof))). Tested thousands of times on hundreds of forums...
If you do such shootings, maybe it would be cheaper to close the forum?
But here's a question: what if we entrust moderator rights to trusted users? Well, not a moderator, but a smaller one, say, the ability to only delete topics like "sell EA"? What do you think?
Common sense. Friend is an honourable thing. Just do not delete, but make them hidden, so as to prevent irretrievability. Very sensible. I second that. No matter how you look at it, trash has to be dealt with. Though the "search" is not a shame, but it will be easier - for sure.
Well, that's the details. :) I, too, think that self-moderation of the forum -- and public scrutiny -- is a very good thing. After all, it used to be impossible not to put down a nickel for a ticket when you got on the bus, didn't it? :)
You can't cut the word.
You can only be banned after a few warnings and ONLY when the forum rules have been broken. To prove that any statement by poet is a violation of forum rules, or to prove that all his statements are flood, that is not related to trading - is also NOT possible (at least I can easily prove to any accuser poet poet that he is wrong).
Without an offence and without a clear charge referring to a breach of a specific clause of the rules, you CANNOT punish a person.
This is called GOVERNMENT. The whole world is based on the fact that there is justice.
And you want to start a lawless forum based on subjective "like-dislike".
Show that the person has violated the rules, show that they have been disciplined, such as warnings, and only then you can ban a person, while giving him a chance to defend himself, to justify himself.
Homo sapiens usually do exactly that (at least since Pontius Pilate's trial 2000 years ago).
...
And you want to start a lawless forum based on subjective likes/dislikes.
...
It's not a crime not to give up your seat to a pregnant woman.
Talking loudly in public is also not a crime.
Farting in public is not a crime.
But for some reason, it's highly condemned by society.
If you're doing this kind of shooting, wouldn't it be cheaper to close down the forum?
No, it wouldn't. Just take a sense of humour test when you register.
Am I too hard to write?)))
>> ok. Aspeshli foru: ))) signify the writer's smile. Hans Jotl's reworked phrase about culture, too, on deeper analysis, might suggest that the writer of the post is trying to make a joke.
Avaz?
Not giving up your seat to a pregnant woman in public transport is not a crime either.
Talking loudly in public is not a crime.
Farting in public isn't a crime either.
But for some reason, it is widely condemned by society.
You don't see the difference between breaking the ETHICS (rules of conduct) and an offence.
Any OPENly disrespectful act against the rules of behaviour in society is called and qualified as Hooliganism by the Administrative Code. Whereas the "rules of conduct" are not prescribed anywhere and only a court can determine the limits of the violation.
The poet has not violated anyone's rights here: if you don't like it, don't read it. Which I personally, for example, do.
All the best.