New Forum Structure

[wackypete2]

Yes I can see it could be read that way, but it doesn't to me. For example what does "and other communications" refer to. I'd say it could refer to this. Is promoting another company, promotional material, again I'd say yes. I don't know what the NFA means by it, which is key here. It's unclear.

with respect....
It's unclear to you because you are only reading the compliance section. Yours, pb's, mine, or anyone else's "interpretation" of that is irrelevant. The NFA is charged with keeping it's members in line with the regulations regarding their own communications to the public about their own business, not the communications of others.

Peter

 

[Shakone]

Definition of Promotional Material
• Sales or educational literature distributed to the public, whether
prepared by the Member, its employees, other NFA Members, or
non-Members;

... and more

 

[pboyles]

Definition of Promotional Material
• Sales or educational literature distributed to the public, whether
prepared by the Member, its employees, other NFA Members, or
non-Members;

That pretty much seals it for me, but as Pete says it's up to the NFA to interpret their own rules and take action where appropriate. However I think my skating on thin ice comment is fairly accurate

 

[the hare]

However I think my skating on thin ice comment is fairly accurate

Not only is the ice thin, but the sun is out, and there's a strange creaking noise

 

[wackypete2]

Not only is the ice thin, but the sun is out, and there's a strange creaking noise

Well, we are going to disagree. IMO I don't think NFA would even lift a finger to do anything. In the event you guys are right what would you expect NFA to do?

Peter

 

[Liquid validity]

9037 - NFA COMPLIANCE RULE 2-9: SUPERVISORY PROCEDURES FOR E-MAIL AND THE USE OF WEB SITES

9063 - USE OF ON-LINE SOCIAL NETWORKING GROUPS TO COMMUNICATE WITH THE PUBLIC

 

[the hare]

As is the case with other media, the use of agents' web sites to solicit leads may subject a firm to liability if the agents' leads were generated through deceptive materials posted on a web site. If a firm (either non-Member or Member) maintains a web site which contains deceptive information regarding futures or options trading and a Member pays that firm to provide a hyperlink to the Member's web site, the Member may well be held accountable for the content of the other firm's web site.

I think that's pretty clear

 

[wackypete2]

As is the case with other media, the use of agents' web sites to solicit leads may subject a firm to liability if the agents' leads were generated through deceptive materials posted on a web site. If a firm (either non-Member or Member) maintains a web site which contains deceptive information regarding futures or options trading and a Member pays that firm to provide a hyperlink to the Member's web site, the Member may well be held accountable for the content of the other firm's web site.

I think that's pretty clear

OK.
So then how would t2w be on thin ice if they remove superfundfx type threads and/or advertisements and partner offers when appropriate.

Peter

 

[wackypete2]

What would be helpful is if anyone can find a forum or chat site that has been penalized by NFA some of the reasons stated.

Peter

 

[the hare]

OK.
So then how would t2w be on thin ice if they remove superfundfx type threads and/or advertisements and partner offers when appropriate.

I cant really answer that without getting a ban

 

[pboyles]

OK.
So then how would t2w be on thin ice if they remove superfundfx type threads and/or advertisements and partner offers when appropriate.

Peter

Pete

T2W sent out a superfundfx partner offer to a targeted group of members. (Aus NZ only). One recipient reported joining the scheme here prior to T2W withdrawing the offer. Yes they did later e mail the recipients and said they did not endorse the product. However I'm not sure that gets them off the hook. It's rather like being caught shoplifting and expecting to get off if you leave the stuff back.

In any case my point was that this type of thing should never get that far, T2W should be welcoming members who are identifying this sort of thing, not ridiculing and banning them.

 

[pboyles]

What would be helpful is if anyone can find a forum or chat site that has been penalized by NFA some of the reasons stated.

Peter

The guy that founded investorshub is in prison now. He was promoting certain shares though I don't recall the nature of how he actually carried that out. I'm guessing it would have been more along the lines of having people post favorably about them rather than sending out actual mailshots. I'll try to find the case and have a look.

 

[the hare]

In any case my point was that this type of thing should never get that far, T2W should be welcoming members who are identifying this sort of thing, not ridiculing and banning them.

The problem of course is we dont know if the two moderators who where ridiculing and threatening bans where acting in an official t2w capacity, or expressing a personal opinion (as of course they are entitled to do)

I would say that if a moderator is threatening to ban someone then that sounds very much like official t2w policy. However to confuse the issue Steve has now said that he's prepared to provide an official answer to a question that they where threatening to ban you for asking earlier today.

Its all very confusing.

 

[counter_violent]

The problem of course is we dont know if the two moderators who where ridiculing and threatening bans where acting in an official t2w capacity, or expressing a personal opinion (as of course they are entitled to do)

I would say that if a moderator is threatening to ban someone then that sounds very much like official t2w policy. However to confuse the issue Steve has now said that he's prepared to provide an official answer to a question that they where threatening to ban you for asking earlier today.

Its all very confusing.

Pot kettle black.

There is no confusion whatsoever.

Steve has stated quite openly that he will be dealing with T2W policy in the future. So, you will all just have to be patient and wait. In the mean time, it would be most helpful if you and others would refrain from littering the boards with nonsense at every opportunity.

 

[scose-no-doubt]

In the mean time, it would be most helpful if you and others would refrain from littering the boards with nonsense at every opportunity

Do I have to do my analysis of the first two new posts pages of forum content again?

 

[forker]

Would every other opportunity be acceptable?

 

[Steve]

There's no confusion here.

A thread has been removed, somebody asked why, that question will be answered. This is a T2W 'policy' issue and it is right and proper that it is answered by someone on the staff.

How members conduct themselves when communicating about these and other issues is a matter for independant moderation. So if a moderator decides that something needs an intervention then they are free, as always, to make that without influence from anyone on the staff.

That's how moderation works.

 

[Lightning McQueen]

There's no confusion here.

A thread has been removed, somebody asked why, that question will be answered. This is a T2W 'policy' issue and it is right and proper that it is answered by someone on the staff.

How members conduct themselves when communicating about these and other issues is a matter for independant moderation. So if a moderator decides that something needs an intervention then they are free, as always, to make that without influence from anyone on the staff.

That's how moderation works.

it wasn't just any old thread either, it was a feedback thread that's been deleted, asking right and proper questions on the t2w advertisement that was mailed out to targeted individuals. as such there is now no feedback from t2w as to what the next raft of checks and balances (on top of the previous checks and balances set up) to reassure us members that no such dire advertisements are mailed in the future.

yes in the past, for a short period, moderation was free from staff influence. the so called independent period of no admins meddling on board content is well over and gone.

 

[Lightning McQueen]

This is in stark contrast to a forum I had occasion to use recently. The behaviour of site staff and admin and certain site facilities were shocking. Truly extraordinarily bad. The only explanation I can think of is that they are intending to relocate and become North Korea's premier trading forum.

that particular forum acted very badly and blatantly protected a known scammer. even in the face of the obvious they still closed threads and have not allowed further discussion on their behavior.

which brings me back to this particular ongoing episode. i had faith that our forum have acted in a better manner, compared to over there. now i'm not so sure.

 

[pboyles]

A thread was removed, somebody asked why and was initially ignored. When he asked again he was ridiculed and threatened with a life ban.

That's how moderation works?

There's no confusion here.

A thread has been removed, somebody asked why, that question will be answered. This is a T2W 'policy' issue and it is right and proper that it is answered by someone on the staff.

How members conduct themselves when communicating about these and other issues is a matter for independant moderation. So if a moderator decides that something needs an intervention then they are free, as always, to make that without influence from anyone on the staff.

That's how moderation works.