A New High ?

Well it is an acquired taste. I don't agree wit the porn stuff myself but the rest was gold :) same with Pazienza.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
the hare said:
Mr Charts will be delighted to hear that :LOL:
Click to expand...

I've apologised to Charts numerous times. That one was mainly my fault but one could argue a more mature individual would not have bitten the bait... unless he himself likes to indulge in a big of trollulz naughtiness from time to time.
 
aDummyaShimmyaTry said:
Barjon doesn't like me, he hasn't since the Howard debacle and doesn't share my sense of humor. But he's the one with the "ban" and "delete" buttons, despite not being able to trade his way out of a paper bag.
Click to expand...

Removed post due to the lulz prevention act 2012.
 
Last edited:
scose-no-doubt said:
When did I say anything about trade2win or staff being evil and corrupt?
Click to expand...
It was a broad characterisation of your general position. But no, you're quite correct, I don't recall you ever saying that as such and apologise unreservedly for any offence caused and will gladly edit my post accordingly if you'd like me to.

scose-no-doubt said:
I've said you politic your way through answers and do not offer much in the way of substance as far as some of your responses are concerned....
Click to expand...
I'm sorry you feel that way. I do my level best which, clearly, falls well short of your expectations. I suggest you submit your CV plus covering letter to Sharky if you think you can do better. May be you can. I will happily stand aside for anyone who is able to do a better job than me in making T2W a better place.

scose-no-doubt said:
I said that past events indicate a pattern of behaviour that suggest the aims of the organisation are not in the best interests of the majority of stakeholders and that I believe that over recent years the bulk of increases in revenues have derived from engaging in behaviour that a lot of us would call unethical. I said that trade2win has a habit of associating with people and organisation of questionable ethics and credentials. As my interpretation can be based only on the information I have at hand and what I've experienced as a member, I've presented many questions that if answered would clarify trade2wins position and none have been answered.
Click to expand...
With the benefit of hindsight there have indeed been some 'associations' with companies or individuals 'of questionable ethics'. And I can't offer a water tight guarantee that there won't be more in the future. But hey, this is a discussion forum for traders, not clairvoyants. Lots of peeps thought Bernie Madoff was a great bloke until his house of cards fell down.

scose-no-doubt said:
Trying to boil my points down to some sort of good and evil nonsense is more than a little condescending. I have said that I think trade2win puts revenues ahead of all else and that this is an understandable business decision. One that I think that trade2win should not attempt to disguise. Why would I change my viewpoint if t2w continues to be evasive with regard to certain issues? Granted you have no obligation to answer anything I ask but I believe that other members would find the answers interesting too, though I have no way of proving this..
Click to expand...
Again, I'm merely characterising the general tone of your posts. That's how they come across to me. Given, as in this case, what you write is directed at me and/or my colleagues, why don't you try making your points in a less combative style. Read through your own posts to this thread and it's sibling 'Low' thread and ask yourself 'would I speek like this if I was in the same room (as timsk, barjon etc.) - talking to them face to face? Try writing posts as if you were and you'll be amazed at just how much trouble and effort I will go to respond to what I perceive to be constructive criticism.

scose-no-doubt said:
What you're doing with posts like this is tantamount to character assassination (or the demonising I've referred to in the other thread) when in actuality I've been quite civil with anyone I've had any discussions with and I've presented nothing more than what I believe to be logical argument. I've even broken 90%+ of it down into single points and in some cases even asked you yourself to respond to which of the things I presented as facts that you have issue with and I've been ignored for the most part and received no direct response, just a diversionary discussion pertaining to something marginally related, in regards to the remaining minority..
Click to expand...
scose - I've made no reference to your character at all. However, I'm sorry you feel this way and if you can reference specific elements of any post of mine that you feel is an assault on your character I will happily edit it or delete it accordingly. Fair enough?

As for not answering your questions - there's very little point. To me, your stance appears to be one in which you've made your mind up and the door is firmly bolted with regards to having it changed. If you perceive something as black, there's no point in me or anyone else trying to convince you it's white or even grey. Again, I may be wrong, but you appear to enjoy lulz (I hope you don't consider that an attempt at character assasination - it's just my perception of you.) As such, a chief lulz tool is to engage staff in endless circuitous 'debates' - repeating the same stuff over and over again on different threads. Apart from being mind numbingly boring, I have better things to do with my time. Based on your posting history, if I answered your questions, you wouldn't reply with 'thanks for answering my questions timsk' - you'd give me yet more grief and accuse me of defending the indefensible. Oooops, sorry, there I go again, getting you muddled up with the hare.

scose-no-doubt said:
Also, why do you say I'm confrontational? I disagree with a lot of what goes on here and I believe that some of it is as unethical (for me!) as the activities carried out by third parties that are discussed on these boards very boards and I think that the evasiveness shown by trade2win sometimes borders on dishonesty. You'll probably say I'm attacking again but... the question of t2w's integrity has been brought up - with very good reason - in the past. Why was it not called confrontational when other users did it then? What is confrontational about me voicing my opinion when I've asked for clarification of trade2win position to prove me wrong? .
Click to expand...
Why do I say you're confrontational? Seriously, all joking, lulz and nonsense aside - can you honestly look me in the virtual interweb eye and say you don't understand why I think that? I'm an active member of 3 very different discussion forums - of which this is one. They are as diverse in subject matter and membership as you could possibly imagine and you, the hare and a few others are among the most confrontational people I've ever come across - and by a very wide margin. Sorry if this is upsetting to you - but it's an honest comment based on my experience. If it's not how you think of yourself - then I hope you take my comment on board as useful feedback. Seriously, I'm not trying to goad or provoke you in any way - it's genuinely what I think.

scose-no-doubt said:
Just because you don't like the questions I'm asking doesn't mean I'm polarising or being confrontational.
Click to expand...
I don't mind anyone asking any questions they like. That includes you scose. I'm just tired and bored of all the endless ping pong that goes nowhere. For debate to be worthwhile and constructive, both parties need certain things in common. They need to respect one another's views and, in the case of T2W, be focused on making the site a better place for its members. Based on your posts, I don't feel that you respect me or my views and I don't believe that you're interested in making the site a better place for the members. Under these circumstances, you're never going to be happy with anything I say - so there's precious little point in me engaging with you. So, at least you know why I don't reply to all of your questions. To end on a positive note - you can turn this around very quickly and easily. Like I say, I will go to great lengths to engage with anyone who is polite and genuinely has the best interests of T2W and its members at heart.
;)
Tim.
 
timsk said:
As for not answering your questions - there's very little point.
Click to expand...

Its a little difficult to have any sort of debate unless you do

By not addressing those questions, it possibly looks as if you are avoiding doing so to save yourselves embarrassment. People will draw their own (possibly incorrect) conclusions.
 
The hare,
I've given my (comprehensive) reasons for this in my post to s-n-d. Besides, the questions are probably answered on numerous occasions elsewhere! If I could answer them without my answers being used to beat me to death with - I'd happily do so. It's for this very reason that so few people 'on this side of the fence' engage in threads like this one. Indeed, I'm frequently told I'm an idiot (quite rightly in this instance) for making a rod for my own back. Like I say, when the basics are in place: respect for me and my colleagues, backed by a genuine wish to make T2W a better place for its members - I'll go out of my way to answer any number of questions on any aspect of the site's business (that I know about). I think that's fair on everyone - including me.

I spent well over an hour drafting that post to s-n-d, because I know that you and others will go through it with a fine tooth comb looking for any little mole hill you can find to build a mountain out of. It's incredibly tiring, stressful and boring reading and re-reading what one's written with your mindset. Consequently, I'd rather not do it. If the wider membership think ill of me because of it - that's a risk I'm willing to take. They are welcome to PM me and ask anything they want and I'll happily answer to the best of my ability.
Tim.
 
timsk said:
With the benefit of hindsight there have indeed been some 'associations' with companies or individuals 'of questionable ethics'. And I can't offer a water tight guarantee that there won't be more in the future. But hey, this is a discussion forum for traders, not clairvoyants. Lots of peeps thought Bernie Madoff was a great bloke until his house of cards fell down.
.
Click to expand...


Yes but when Bernie was caught they soon changed their minds. Gain/FOREX.COM and FXDD continue to be rebate partners despite being caught. You don't need clairvoyance to see that, its all been published here before and quite some time ago in the case of Gain.
 
timsk said:
I have never objected to constructive criticism about where we go wrong and what we need to do to address problems. Indeed, I make a point of welcoming it.
Click to expand...

OK.

1. Dump the dubious educational material, that steers people to vendors of questionable pedigree.

2. Dump the whole dumbed down head to head with babypips thing.

3. Bring in re-packaged regulated financial products.

4. Overhaul the forum layout.
Replace first steps sub forum title with "New to trading" or similar.
Condense other sub forum categories.

5. Conversely, radically expand the single stock sections with boards for each stock. Either admin created or user created.
Simple fact is that is the meat of the online forum business - example iii (Interactive Investor).

6. Application only for those wanting to post any kind of external link advertising.
Blanket ban for everything else, unless pre-approved.

Thats all I can think of right now.
In fact, I really don't know why you don't create polls yourself to ask users
what they want and highlight them on the landing page.

In a nutshell - I don't see any reason you can't take on the likes of iii, ET, FF etc.
in one go.
Depends whether you want to or not.
Dumbing down is not the answer.
iii has more traffic and more members than here, ask yourself why,
and how you can emulate that.

Hows that for positive input?
 
timsk said:
the questions are probably answered on numerous occasions elsewhere!
Click to expand...

I don't think they are, and I've read the site quite widely. Furthermore, as I have a professional interest in those kinds of issues, I'm sure that particular discussion would have been brought to my attention.

As the individual responsible for site content, perhaps you could give me an indication where these questions have been asked previously and answered.

Ive tried the search facility, but with no luck I'm afraid.:cry:
 
Liquid validity said:
Dumbing down is not the answer.
iii has more traffic and more members than here, ask yourself why,
and how you can emulate that.

Hows that for positive input?
Click to expand...

The founder of InvestorsHub (iii.co.uk) is doing 4 years for share fraud. I'm not sure Sharky wants to follow that particular path.

Also if particular shares are being discussed they will have to exclude pink sheets and all that Frankfurt crap or else the place will be full of pump and dump criminals.
 
pboyles said:
The founder of InvestorsHub (iii.co.uk) is doing 4 years for share fraud. I'm not sure Sharky wants to follow that particular path.

Also if particular shares are being discussed they will have to exclude pink sheets and all that Frankfurt crap or else the place will be full of pump and dump criminals.
Click to expand...

Investors Hub Fraud
That the case you mean?
I thought InvestorsHub was owned by ADVFN?

Agree on the pink sheets etc.
Also agree on the pump and dump merchants, that is the downside of
boards that specialise in individual stocks.
There is usually a downside to anything though.
 
pboyles said:
Yes but when Bernie was caught they soon changed their minds. Gain/FOREX.COM and FXDD continue to be rebate partners despite being caught. You don't need clairvoyance to see that, its all been published here before and quite some time ago in the case of Gain.
Click to expand...
peebee,
You have highlighted this elsewhere and I'm sure that admin are aware of your views and will review the situation accordingly. Other than that, I can't comment as I have zero input into this area of T2W. I've not followed the details of these respective cases in the way you clearly have but, presumably, they've had their knuckles smacked by the regulatory authorities and given assurances that it won't happen again.

Barclays bank aren't about to collapse on account of their customers deserting them and their numerous sub contractors refusing to work for them following the Libor rate fixing scandal. Do you see where I'm coming from? To use an american expression - I think you need to cut us some slack here!
Tim.
 
the hare said:
I don't think they are, and I've read the site quite widely. Furthermore, as I have a professional interest in those kinds of issues, I'm sure that particular discussion would have been brought to my attention.

As the individual responsible for site content, perhaps you could give me an indication where these questions have been asked previously and answered.

Ive tried the search facility, but with no luck I'm afraid.:cry:
Click to expand...
the hare,
You already know the answers and this is another example of you deliberately trying to waste my time. Let's make this easy for both of us: you make up a bunch of answers and I'll tell you if I agree with them!
;)
Tim.
 
timsk said:
Let's make this easy for both of us: you make up a bunch of answers and I'll tell you if I agree with them!
Click to expand...

s-n-d already did that, and he's still waiting.:whistling

It is rather concerning that you have little or no knowledge of the issues relating to your preferred broker partners, and the regulatory issues that they've faced.

How can you be in a position to recommend them when you know absolutely nothing about them (that's a rhetorical question, as an ex industry insider I know the answer :p)
 
timsk said:
I'm sorry you feel that way. I do my level best which, clearly, falls well short of your expectations. I suggest you submit your CV plus covering letter to Sharky if you think you can do better. May be you can. I will happily stand aside for anyone who is able to do a better job than me in making T2W a better place.

You know what I meant Timsk. You're being a bit difficult for no reason here but out of curiosity, what is your job spec?

With the benefit of hindsight there have indeed been some 'associations' with companies or individuals 'of questionable ethics'. And I can't offer a water tight guarantee that there won't be more in the future. But hey, this is a discussion forum for traders, not clairvoyants. Lots of peeps thought Bernie Madoff was a great bloke until his house of cards fell down.

And if people had done their due diligence into Madoff ad his accountant then the whole fiasco could likely have been avoided. Why is my suggesting a high level of scrutiny on t2w's behalf before presenting associates etc when other people's money is on the line deemed as being finicky?

Again, I'm merely characterising the general tone of your posts. That's how they come across to me. Given, as in this case, what you write is directed at me and/or my colleagues, why don't you try making your points in a less combative style. Read through your own posts to this thread and it's sibling 'Low' thread and ask yourself 'would I speek like this if I was in the same room (as timsk, barjon etc.) - talking to them face to face? Try writing posts as if you were and you'll be amazed at just how much trouble and effort I will go to respond to what I perceive to be constructive criticism.

Well this is the problem with written forums. Context is extremely relative. You say combative, I say direct. I've told you many times that I'm not out to offend or cause trouble and this is exactly the attitude I have in teh reelz too

scose - I've made no reference to your character at all. However, I'm sorry you feel this way and if you can reference specific elements of any post of mine that you feel is an assault on your character I will happily edit it or delete it accordingly. Fair enough?

Planting seeds like saying I polarise and believe t2w and staff are evil and corrupt which you apologised for. A lot of subtext and tone in the way you deal with me in general really but as I said it's prolly just that we don't ever seem to see eye-to-eye.

As for not answering your questions - there's very little point. To me, your stance appears to be one in which you've made your mind up and the door is firmly bolted with regards to having it changed. If you perceive something as black, there's no point in me or anyone else trying to convince you it's white or even grey. Again, I may be wrong, but you appear to enjoy lulz (I hope you don't consider that an attempt at character assasination - it's just my perception of you.) As such, a chief lulz tool is to engage staff in endless circuitous 'debates' - repeating the same stuff over and over again on different threads. Apart from being mind numbingly boring, I have better things to do with my time. Based on your posting history, if I answered your questions, you wouldn't reply with 'thanks for answering my questions timsk' - you'd give me yet more grief and accuse me of defending the indefensible. Oooops, sorry, there I go again, getting you muddled up with the hare.

For clarity;s sake, what do you believe I have my mind made up about? Lulz...Lulz is subjective, Timsk, it's not a blanket term for a specified set of actions. The kind of lulz I enjoy on t2w are those of a similar vein to Cahodas and Bagsladdapoopy lulz (which ironically, t2w fuelled) as well as bizarre, random behaviour and some of the more outrageous characters. By and large I do nothing (aside from my having a potty mouth) to offend or disrupt mods or staff. What have I done to make you believe otherwise? Do I not try to engage in threads positively? Do I not report spam posts for mods to delete? Do I not frequently delete my own posts when a conversation detracts a thread?
The endless debates in which I'm frequently involved occur because the same or similar issues arise time and time again. Why would I answer "thanks for answering, Timsk" if there's more to be said? Am I not allowed to engage in conversation with you? If you're too busy fair enough.

Why do I say you're confrontational? Seriously, all joking, lulz and nonsense aside - can you honestly look me in the virtual interweb eye and say you don't understand why I think that? I'm an active member of 3 very different discussion forums - of which this is one. They are as diverse in subject matter and membership as you could possibly imagine and you, the hare and a few others are among the most confrontational people I've ever come across - and by a very wide margin. Sorry if this is upsetting to you - but it's an honest comment based on my experience. If it's not how you think of yourself - then I hope you take my comment on board as useful feedback. Seriously, I'm not trying to goad or provoke you in any way - it's genuinely what I think.

Well I'm sorry you feel that way. I'm not sure everyone would agree with your sentiments but there's really nothing I can do is there. I find it hard to understand how someone can be deemed confrontational over the internet anyhow but hey ho this is the digital age after all.

I don't mind anyone asking any questions they like. That includes you scose. I'm just tired and bored of all the endless ping pong that goes nowhere. For debate to be worthwhile and constructive, both parties need certain things in common. They need to respect one another's views and, in the case of T2W, be focused on making the site a better place for its members. Based on your posts, I don't feel that you respect me or my views and I don't believe that you're interested in making the site a better place for the members. Under these circumstances, you're never going to be happy with anything I say - so there's precious little point in me engaging with you. So, at least you know why I don't reply to all of your questions. To end on a positive note - you can turn this around very quickly and easily. Like I say, I will go to great lengths to engage with anyone who is polite and genuinely has the best interests of T2W and its members at heart.
;)
Tim.

Absolute gold. This is your belief but I'm the one who is steadfast and stubborn? I'm interested in which of my posts lead you to believe that I don't have members best interests at heart?

Scose trolling 1

Scose trolling 2

Scose trolling 3

Scose trolling 4

You're right about one thing though. While I can entertain and respect your opinions I've lost any respect I had for you as an individual. I think you're a condescending schmoozer, a sycophant, and more than a little manipulative. But I don't know you that well, only through the boards. Not that you should care anyway...
I wonder if giving an honest opinion on a member of staff is a ban-able offence? I guess we'll find out.
Click to expand...

So in the end, to me, this all seems to boil down to you not liking me very much and holding the belief that as a member, I'm not really worth the effort or the "trouble" I cause and I have nothing positive to add to trade2win - and that's fair enough. Why not just get rid of me again? It's not like trade2win hasn't got rid of me before for doing nothing wrong eh :D
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

the hare
What's stopping you from being a BSD ?
2
Replies
28
Views
15K
foroom lluzers
F
S
Swing-Trading.com Stock Picks for Feb 17, 09
Replies
2
Views
1K
swingtradingcom
S
the hare
A new (lulz) high
3 4 5
Replies
85
Views
12K
Steve
Steve
A
I'm a Politician Get me Outta Here!
Replies
0
Views
2K
Airthrey Capital
A
bbmac
The Hedge Fund Thread
2
Replies
36
Views
11K
anley
A
Top