An imbalance of subscribers among signal providers - page 3

New comment
 
Marat Khabiev:

... Our opinion is that if you display the full number of subscribers, you shouldn't include them in the rating calculation. Moreover, there is sorting by number of subscribers. ...

I completely agree with this one. "Number of subscribers" doesn't assess signal quality. Sorting by "subscribers" is enough.
 

Of course, thanks for the peer review.

If all the subscribers were here, would he have brought up such a topic?

Friends, we benefit from hiding our subscribers if there are more than 100 of them on the signal.

But if no one hears us and suddenly we are the "lucky" ones, we will not promote this proposal.

 
Marat Khabiev:

Of course, thanks for the peer review.

If all the subscribers were here, would he have brought up such a topic?

Friends, we benefit from hiding our subscribers if there are more than 100 of them on the signal.

But if no one hears us and suddenly we are the "lucky" ones, we will not promote this proposal.

Marat, if you ask me, they don't even have to indicate how many people are there. Let's just say the quality, that's all.
 
Vladimir Zubov:
But on the other hand Marat, at a quick glance, has 100 subscribers for 20$. Isn't 1600 net enough for a man, does he need 16k ? Is this what the theme is about?
100 subscribers we have had for a year, and these are apparently our old subscribers. New ones don't come because they have somewhere to go. We're defending the right to sober choice, which will eventually get us new subscribers.
 
Marat Khabiev:

... in case we're the lucky ones, we're not going to promote it.

That's right -- greed rules.

Not, like me, to admire the process, to "sit by the river and wait..."http://prikolov.net/prikol/poslovica(there are many variations on this theme, the link is not the best)

That works for me:"If you sit with your back to the river, you may not see the victory."

 
Andrey F. Zelinsky:
I completely agree with this one. "Number of subscribers" does not assess signal quality. Sorting by "subscribers" is enough.
Thank you for the correct way of thinking.
 
I agree with Marat in some respects, it is strange. There is even an anti-monopoly committee in all countries to protect against this kind of thing. But Marat, your company would suffer here too.
 
Vladimir Zubov:
I agree with Marat in some respects, it is strange. There is even an anti-monopoly committee in all countries to protect against this kind of thing. But Marat, your company would also suffer.
Why would it? The proposal is to limit display only, people will sign up wherever they want and there can be as many as they want.
 
Marat Khabiev:
Why would it hurt? The suggestion is to limit the display only, people will subscribe wherever they want and there can be as many as they want.
Actually there is some truth to it, it always pisses me off to advertise with the word "sales leader", no need to specify how many have signed up here at all and not count that in the rankings.
 
The funny thing about this thread is that the people making the decisions on signals are probably already on holiday ))
12345678910...12
New comment