Who trades on the Live LAVINA system? DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY LOSSES? - page 13
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
Wise man, show them how to trade...
Wise man, show them how to trade...
I deleted Wise Man's post with the swearing. That was the reason for the ban" - Wisest was banned.
Prove it or you are no different from the lockers. Just as thoughtless.
My point is that lock is different from closing a pose after all.
How is it different? With a lock you open an opposite position of the same volume. When you close a position, you open an opposite position of the same size.
A == B => h.t.c.
Eni commens?
This has nothing to do with avalanche as avalanche uses an asymmetric lock. Before giving any feedback on avalanche, you should at least have an idea of how it works.
Further, an asymmetrical lock is like closing a part of a position equal in modulo to the smaller of the two.
SELL 1.0 vs BUY 1.2 == BUY 0.2. Again, this is obvious.
How is it different? When you lock, you open an opposite position of the same volume. When you close a position, you open an opposite position of the same volume.
A == B => h.t.c.
Eni comments?
I asked first.
Obviously-obviously, you don't need to mention the concept of "proof" if you don't even know what it is.
Mathematicians lose on forex (speculators win) - an unfortunate example.
Do you even understand what you're saying, you speculator? :)
What stupid high-sounding bullshit. If you have mathematical education and it prevents you from forgetting mathematics (like Sherlock Holmes diligently forgot astronomy). If not Sherlock Holmes, and IQ is higher than the room temperature, it is worth using for your own good. You should not be afraid of knowledge.
I asked first.
Obviously, you don't need to mention the concept of "proof" if you don't even know what it is.
Well, don't use it if you don't know it. That's all there is to it.
And seriously, this is a forum for fairly science-intensive topics, not pontorazka. Let's maintain an appropriate level of discussion. I, for example, argue that if C == B and A == B, then C == A. What are you talking about?
Well, don't use it if you don't know. It's a big deal.
But seriously, it's a forum for fairly science-intensive topics, not pontoon-cutting. Let's maintain an appropriate level of discussion. I, for example, argue that if C == B and A == B, then C == A. What are you talking about?
There have been more than one thread on this forum swearing between locksmiths and anti-locksmiths. So in these branches opponents locks somehow had to get to a list of differences locs and closures (lockers did not get anywhere at all). True, then again it all got hushed up and again rolled back to swearing.
Look for it, you will find. And to discuss your primitive "C == B and A == B, then C == A" is not interesting at all.
Well, don't use it if you don't know it. That's all there is to it.
If you're going to prove it, prove it, don't draw ABWGDaeka.
How long? 20 minutes at the most! For me, two days would not be a shame, if it meant protecting my honor and dignity.
I believe that honour and dignity existed in the days of dueling. And nowadays, how can it exist. The entire society is corrupt from top to bottom and if conflicts arise, it is customary to resolve them with the help of hired hitmen. And here on this forum it is common to insult each other, thanks to the impunity that anonymity and distance separating opponents provides.
Further, an asymmetrical lock is like closing a part of a position equal in modulo to the smaller of the two.
SELL 1.0 vs BUY 1.2 == BUY 0.2. Again, this is obvious.
No need to write the platitudes. The post I commented on was talking about complete position closure, which is not the case in the avalanche.