A New Low?

[pboyles]

IMHO forum sites such as t2w should not go beyond offering a platform for collaboration to its members. No point in getting involved in court cases and the likes.
.

Dont worry they wont.

 

[the hare]

IMHO forum sites such as t2w should not go beyond offering a platform for collaboration to its members. No point in getting involved in court cases and the likes.

In principle I agree. However there are commercial considerations which mean that sites such as t2w realistically cannot remain impartial. By the same reasoning you could argue that t2w and similar sites shouldnt award titles such as "preferred broker", or promote member award schemes which are almost certainly manipulated by shills etc. Brokers enjoy these positive aspects, so why shouldnt they also be subjected to the other side of the same coin ?

I
people who got smacked by scam artists or brokers can use this forum to interact with their counterparties.

But often they cant, because t2w becomes the target of legal threats from those running the scam. Can you imagine what would happen if pboyles launched a campaign against FXCM, and the campaign gained traction ?

FXCM would be well within their rights to be a little annoyed with t2w if they where to allow their site to be used as the focus for such a campaign. FXCM where promoted as a preferred broker, they are regular advertisers, they have been the recipients of awards, and they partner with t2w with the fxdesk business. FXCM have a right to expect some loyalty from t2w, and they have the resources to make life difficult even if t2w decided to openly support its membership.

Thats the key point point, you cant offer a platform for collaboration that is free from commercial considerations, if that platform is being run as a business.

If they decide to go legal; the court is the place to go to.

100% agreed

 

[The Leopard]

I'm trying to take a break from the madness of this suite of forums, but the quality of sport (or lulz, if you prefer) is simply too high to absent myself permanently (see below, latest Slooplappy shenanigans).

With regard to the simmering hatred between Wackypete and Toast, I have some sympathy with both positions. I recognise context is important, although I would in the end take an absolute position.

I agree with Toast that it is somewhat unpleasant to hear that people "deserve" to be ripped off. Really? This seems rather callous and cruel, and I am not sure in any case that it can be said to be true. Do people "deserve" to be the victims of crime? They might take actions that make it highly likely that they will be victims, but do they deserve to be such as a result? I think not.

People might fail to take reasonable steps to safeguard themselves or their belongings, but surely this does not mean that they merit the deliberate depredations of wicked and responsible persons?

Thus far (and indeed overall) do I agree with Toast. I think however that his comparison (unscrupulous mechanic) is a false one, and does not do justice to the point that (I believe)Pete is trying to make. People do not go to a mechanic lured by the promise that the expenditure of a few hundred dollars will turn their jalopy into a mint-condition 1950s Jaguar Roadster. They do not imagine that by visiting the mechanic they will become privy to extraordinary motoring secrets. They would be unconvinced if the mechanic claimed to be able to change their lives in exchange for 20 minutes of tinkering.

Now look at the claims made by some educators and purveyors of systems. One vendor (well-known on this site) recently claimed many thousands of pips a month. Jacko, whose name will live in infamy at Forex Factory (although not if Forex Factory management has anything to do with it), induced people to wire tens of thousands of dollars to a foreign bank on nothing more than the strength of a popular thread. And this very day, it has been alleged that our old friend Mahmoud Whatthefu ckpoopies got some of his turtles to pay between 30 and 50 thousand pounds for the privilege of being rogered by him.

These people are not suffering from a lack of know-how. They are blinded by unhinged greed, made foolish by rampant avarice. It is hard to have much sympathy for them - very hard indeed. I believe it is this type of scenario that Pete had in mind when making his comments, and if so I fully understand what he meant.

These people are not pure victims, they are at least the co-authors of their own misfortune. That is an important point and one worth pointing out for their own and others' benefit. Nonetheless, I would not say that the victim of any crime "deserves" it, and their folly (if such has been committed) does not in any way lessen the culpability of the criminal, who remains wholly responsible for his actions.

 

[pboyles]

.

These people are not pure victims, they are at least the co-authors of their own misfortune. That is an important point and one worth pointing out for their own and others' benefit. Nonetheless, I would not say that the victim of any crime "deserves" it, and their folly (if such has been committed) does not in any way lessen the culpability of the criminal, who remains wholly responsible for his actions.

Very true, you should really go and have a look at the Senen Pousa thread, that particular scheme fell apart with amazing speed. Just like with Mahmoud many of Pousa's 'investors' were well warned in advance but did it anyway, at least 3 were taken for over $100,000 each, the minimum account size being $10,000. It seems like hardly a month passes without such a scandal.

If I remember correctly one of the people who paid Mahoud actually saw the bankruptcy documents prior to paying but still went ahead.

 

[tar]

the hare i dont understand your Fxcm case study , i am sure if i make a new thread about fxcm's slippage practices it will not be deleted , check other discussion boards where Fxcm advertise you will see threads about fxcm ( fine , slippage , bad experience .... ) that's a normal thing in the FX world , in every forum you will see posts and threads about traders bad experiences with their brokers , nobody will stop them from posting ...

 

[The Leopard]

Very true, you should really go and have a look at the Senen Pousa thread, that particular scheme fell apart with amazing speed. Just like with Mahmoud many of Pousa's 'investors' were well warned in advance but did it anyway, at least 3 were taken for over $100,000 each, the minimum account size being $10,000. It seems like hardly a month passes without such a scandal.

If I remember correctly one of the people who paid Mahoud actually saw the bankruptcy documents prior to paying but still went ahead.

This is the point I was trying to make. Whilst I disagree with Pete's use of the word "deserve", excessive sympathy with victims, or the denial of a person's responsibility to take sensible precautions and make reasoned judgements, is actively harmful to the victims and can only increase the number of future victims.

This attitude towards victims - motivated I should say by kindness and the best of intentions - can have horrific consequences. How many victims of domestic violence (and indeed murder) have had ample evidence of the wickedness of their partners? Yet society, with its cult of the immaculate victim and its espousal of non-judgementalism, encourages them to neglect their own safety and excuse their abusers.

A balance needs to be struck between sympathy for the victim and a stern insistence that people need to look to their own well-being. Sympathy after the event is little consolation, particularly when victim-hood could have been avoided.

 

[scose-no-doubt]

So you're saying that because some people are easily exploited by those more intelligent and less scrupulous then they deserve to lose their money as they are blinded by pound signs? I like to think I'm a too nice a person to be able to agree with that kind of philosophy.

 

[The Leopard]

So you're saying that because some people are easily exploited by those more intelligent and less scrupulous then they deserve to lose their money as they are blinded by pound signs? I like to think I'm a too nice a person to be able to agree with that kind of philosophy.

Is that directed at me Scose? I actually stated the opposite - that people do not deserve to be victims of criminals, regardless of their own actions.

 

[scose-no-doubt]

No at Wacky really. Should have said that earlier but Scose plays hard and lose (loose).

 

[The Leopard]

No at Wacky really. Should have said that earlier but Scose plays hard and lose (loose).

That's why we love you.

There's an interesting discussion to be had about your statement that you are 'kind' (which I do not for a moment dispute) - which is truly kind, a sympathetic approach or a stern approach?

I suspect the truth is a grey area in between. But I have done enough philosophising for one day, and the US is open for business.

 

[alphadude]

you will find that many of those gullibles will still get ripped off even if they knew about the scam. They barry their heads in the sand and draw their wallets. Greed gets in their way.

It's an addiction. some get over it after a loss or two; and some will keep betting.

Turtle poopies are a good example. they subscribe to Baghdady's scam; and pay him 50K for it. what a shame.

I still can't believe there are people out there who paid Poopy for his scam. The only explanation so far; is Poopy is genius. He tapped onto a unique market.

 

[timsk]

It may well be a comprehensive guide but nobody will read it, if they did how did the whole Senen Pousa thing become so big on T2W? None of these guys do any due diligence, they just see this 100% a year marketing and can't wait to hand over their money. The only thing that is effective is naming and shaming the people and companies involved. This causes a lot of damage to them, if it didn't why would they get so upset about it?

Hi pb,
T2W is not responsible for its members getting ripped off by (name your scam of choice) as a result of them not reading information prominently displayed on the site. I accept that there was a lack of information on this front for too long - but that hole has now been well and truly filled. By your logic, if I decide to ignore all the hazard labels on a bottle of bleach and drink it - then it's Unilever's (or whoever’s) fault that I get ill and not mine? I don't accept that and I don't think it's in the interests of our members to adopt such a policy either. We're not here to offer a (free) hand maid service. Members have to accept personal responsibility for their actions; they can't blame someone else for anything and everything that goes wrong in their lives.

If you want to pursue a 'naming and shaming' campaign because - in your view - that's the only thing that works, then that's your prerogative. However, that's not what T2W was ever set up to do and isn't the objective of the site. Prevention is better than cure and, with this in mind, I'm keen to do everything possible (within reason) to provide members with the information necessary to help them perform due diligence and make an informed decision about vendors of trading related products and services. Between the numerous discussion threads, FAQs and Stickies - clear warnings are posted about vendors at every turn on T2W. But, like the hazard label on a bottle of bleach, members can ignore them if they want - that's their choice.

If they do due diligence and end up being victims of fraud (a la Bernie Madoff), then it's the regulatory authorities job to step in and investigate. If you want to wage war on specific companies because you're not happy with the response of the FSA and others - that's your decision, but it's unreasonable and unrealistic to expect T2W to spearhead your battles. If that's the route you want to go down, I suggest you start your own website, get some poop hot legal expertise on board and a truck load of money to fund your campaign. I’m sure ’the hare’ and others will be right behind you.

Tim.

 

[pboyles]

By your logic, if I decide to ignore all the hazard labels on a bottle of bleach and drink it - then it's Unilever's (or whoever’s) fault that I get ill and not mine? m.

And by your logic if you see someone about to drink a bottle of bleach you'd say nothing and remind them later they should have read the label, as it was of course prominently displayed.

 

[Liquid validity]

Hi pb,
T2W is not responsible for its members getting ripped off by (name your scam of choice) as a result of them not reading information prominently displayed on the site. I accept that there was a lack of information on this front for too long - but that hole has now been well and truly filled. By your logic, if I decide to ignore all the hazard labels on a bottle of bleach and drink it - then it's Unilever's (or whoever’s) fault that I get ill and not mine? I don't accept that and I don't think it's in the interests of our members to adopt such a policy either. We're not here to offer a (free) hand maid service. Members have to accept personal responsibility for their actions; they can't blame someone else for anything and everything that goes wrong in their lives.

If you want to pursue a 'naming and shaming' campaign because - in your view - that's the only thing that works, then that's your prerogative. However, that's not what T2W was ever set up to do and isn't the objective of the site. Prevention is better than cure and, with this in mind, I'm keen to do everything possible (within reason) to provide members with the information necessary to help them perform due diligence and make an informed decision about vendors of trading related products and services. Between the numerous discussion threads, FAQs and Stickies - clear warnings are posted about vendors at every turn on T2W. But, like the hazard label on a bottle of bleach, members can ignore them if they want - that's their choice.

If they do due diligence and end up being victims of fraud (a la Bernie Madoff), then it's the regulatory authorities job to step in and investigate. If you want to wage war on specific companies because you're not happy with the response of the FSA and others - that's your decision, but it's unreasonable and unrealistic to expect T2W to spearhead your battles. If that's the route you want to go down, I suggest you start your own website, get some poop hot legal expertise on board and a truck load of money to fund your campaign. I’m sure ’the hare’ and others will be right behind you.

Tim.

Tim, its been said before, a zero tolerance policy on ad links would solve the problem.
Even a warning that links are not endorsed by T2W (mentioned before by me).
Other sites operate a zero tolerance policy, so why not T2W.
That is the key question, and the reason this never goes away.

 

[The Leopard]

That is the key question, and the reason this never goes away.

T2W has done some good things, and some bad things.

Stuff has been deleted that shouldn't have been. On the other hand, the mods delete tons of spam and trash every week.

Stuff about Baghdady was deleted in the past. On the other hand, T2W has provided a free and very visible platform for him to get the vendor-shoeing of a lifetime.

T2W has to be commercially viable, or at least I believe that to be the case. That means adverts.

In the end, T2W has to walk a fine line. It is a forum, it is not here to look after people - above all, it must be guided by its own interests.

But the real reason that this never goes away is stupidity. People are stupid, end of discussion. Pboyles went on facebook, warned the trurtles, and got a load of abuse for his pains. Some people are just stupid enough to pay 50 large to get their poopies slapped by Sloobappy. Some people are stupid enough to believe that there are only 89 boxes of Nazi trading pants in the world, and when they're gone, they're gone.

By and large, these people can't be helped. They will ignore warnings and evidence, as Pboyles has demonstrated.

There's no answer to it. I don't blame T2W for making money from ads, and I can't really blame them for not standing up to legal threats. It's not in their interest.

For what it's worth, I think T2W is OK really. They could show a bit more backbone at times, but nonetheless we can post a great deal about the vendors and scumbags. Overall, I think we're better off with it than without it.

 

[barjon]

My own view that it's a bit of a sterile argument going on because it simply can't be an "either/or" because it's both and more. Of course it's right to sound the general warning and prompt people to do their due diligence and to help them go about that task. And it's right to sound more specific warnings based on factual events. And it's right to dissuade people from jumping into a murky pond whether or not they have performed their own due diligence. And it's right to try and rescue them if they do.

After all that it becomes pretty futile to talk about whose fault it is when they come unstuck.

 

[Liquid validity]

Leopard, I agree with your points.
I just think something simple like this would be a big help:
Discussion | Interactive Investor

Click on the thread subject "Vodafone's Two Worlds" to open the post.
Just a random post that highlights that sites external link policy.
Click on the fool link and see the message, thats the kind of thing
I think T2W should do.
I can't see any reason not to, it would be easy enough.

That way its crystal clear to any tards what the situation is.
I do agree tards will come unstuck anyway, there is only so much anyone can do.

 

[wackypete2]

I see someone else is on holiday. I guess I missed all the fun

Peter

 

[tar]

I see someone else is on holiday. I guess I missed all the fun

Peter

lol the hare

 

[The Leopard]

lol the hare

Noooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

First Pboyles and now The Hare!

At times like this one cannot help but think of the immortal words of legendary thinker (and winner of the 2009 World Philosophy Contest) Mahmoud Slapdempoopies:

"What the f uck is going on?"

Does anyone know what his offence was? Is the ban permanent? And most important of all, what lulz did I miss?