[Archive] Learn how to make money villagers! - page 876
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
Dear Villagers, here's a thought suggested by colleagues https://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/139220/page10
What if you don't martyr, but follow the ponzi scheme, it looks the same, but it's not the same...
Link to the humour thread... :-)
Dear Villagers, here's a thought suggested by colleagues https://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/139220/page10
What if you don't martyr, but follow the ponzi scheme, it looks the same, but it's not the same...
Maybe I am wrong, but this is how I understand it: we average a position if it is losing and an order is set in the same direction, and we sink a position if it is profitable and an order is set in the same direction.
You still haven't answered the question, what is averaging? You are averaging the entry price, the entry point. So it does not matter whether you call it a fill-in or averaging. It also does not matter in which area the procedure is performed: in profitable or unprofitable. The result is the same - the averaging of entry price!
And I would call "adding" as a special case of averaging. That is, the averaging in the profitable zone is fractional.
You still haven't answered the question, what is averaging? You are averaging the entry price, the entry point. So it does not matter whether you call it a fill-in or an averaging. It also does not matter in which area the procedure is performed: in profitable or unprofitable. The result is the same - the averaging of entry price!
And I would call "adding" as a special case of averaging. That is, the averaging in a profitable zone is fractional.
However, in the internet you can often find the interpretation that averaging is used to improve an average entry price, which happens when a position is added in a losing area of the initial position. Therefore, in contrast to the term averaging in a profitable zone, the term share is used.
I know what people write about on the internet... The majority opinion is not always correct, because the concept of 'correctness' is subjective and relative. The price is averaged! That's it! What is there to argue about?
ZS. the tendency to divert simple notions away from the truth is a bit disturbing. Love isn't even called love these days, it's just... some bullshit mixed up with sex.
I know what people write about on the internet... The majority opinion is not always correct, because the concept of 'correctness' is subjective and relative. The price is averaged! That's it! What is there to argue about?
ZS. the tendency to divert simple notions away from the truth is a bit disturbing. Love isn't even called love these days, it's just... some bullshit mixed up with sex.
I remember a definition of love from Soviet times: "Love is mutual sympathy based on sexual attraction".
I like another definition. Love is a kind of psychic energy. And like any other energy, it has a direction, i.e. it can be absorbed and it can be radiated.
I have never seen more solid definitions, neither in Soviet times, nor now. Mostly just selfishness is described... Well, this is understandable, most people find it convenient!
Oh, where SHE turns out to lead - the curve of trader's happiness!!! :-)