Of course ET's customers want the guests/members here to turn into their customers, no one is disputing that. My clarification was that we are not ET's customers as claimed but, instead, guests here. And somehow I suspected you would rush to make this obvious point while conveniently ignoring my other points, so I'll make them again without an easy straw dog for you to knock down: Interesting that in all his efforts to quickly agree with anyone on his side Baruch continually side-steps this simple point. And so have all the other posters on this thread. Sounds kinda absurd, doesn't it? Same principle here, why should Baron permit this. I mean, all you honorable guys don't provide free space for direct competition to the paying advertisers on your websites, do you.... Geez guys, no need to stamp your toesies or cry about how life is unfair or "boldly" threaten to leave.... just vote with your feet and move on.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote from Magna: I wonder if I can notify Time magazine that I require free space so that I can discuss companies in direct competition to their advertisers? Or maybe I could call Fox TV and tell them that I require free air time to carry on discussions in direct competition to their advertisers. I mean it's only fair, isn't it? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote from Magna: Sounds kinda absurd, doesn't it? Same principle here, why should Baron permit this. I mean, all you honorable guys don't provide free space for direct competition to the paying advertisers on your websites, do you.... -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- While I have no interest in Forex Trading in general, I comment to point out a few failures in logic, and to offer possible solution. How do you equate TIME Magazine and Fox News (two organizations that create their own content) to an internet BBS (which relies on its 'guests' to create 90% [perhaps, an even higher percentage] of the content available here)? Time and Fox both attract advertisers based on the number of viewers (readers) of their ORIGINAL content. Elitetrader attracts advertisers based on the number of members / visits to view (read) content NOT originating from or by Elitetrader employees. No viewers (readers) for Fox and Time equals no advertisers. However, under the current design of Elitetrader, members are both subscribers (viewers) and content providers. Clearly, your analogy between Time / Fox and Elitetrader does not apply correctly to the current discussion. Within the Software Review section and within the Brokerage Review Section, one can locate a substantial number of opinions expressed regarding the quality of said services. If less than 100% of the products and services located within these two sections do not monetarily sponsor this site, then it would appear Barron does indeed allow what you claim Elitetrader does not - providing Free space for non-advertisers. After reviewing the Terms of Service document, I find no mention of the 'Policy' referred to by Magna regarding discussion of vendors who do not advertise on Elitetrader. Perhaps, one could develop and post a more detailed explanation of allowable discussion points or prohibited policies. A detailed reference such as described may help to eliminate confusion on similar matters in the future.
Agree.. No interest in Forex, Baruch or annoying Globalfxllc .. Magna seems to be inviting criticism by comparing ET with FOX and Time. What makes ET stand apart from any yahoo message board is its members (guests ) like Acrary, nihabaashi contributing freely. (Not like Fox or Time which pays for their content and charges promoters for its promotion). Magna has several good defence for his policies, but defending by comparing ET to Fox and Time does not cut it
I am very sorry, but I thought that it was my journal. That's why I called it "Baruch's Forex System Journal". P.S. I hate any promotion of brokers etc. And I don't care if they are sponsors or not.
Quote from Magna: <b>Of course ET's customers want the guests/members here to turn into their customers, no one is disputing that. My clarification was that we are not ET's customers as claimed but, instead, guests here. And somehow I suspected you would rush to make this obvious point while conveniently ignoring my other points, so I'll make them again without an easy straw dog for you to knock down: Interesting that in all his efforts to quickly agree with anyone on his side Baruch continually side-steps this simple point. And so have all the other posters on this thread.Sounds kinda absurd, doesn't it? Same principle here, why should Baron permit this. I mean, all you honorable guys don't provide free space for direct competition to the paying advertisers on your websites, do you....Geez guys, no need to stamp your toesies or cry about how life is unfair or "boldly" threaten to leave.... just vote with your feet and move on. </b> "WE" don't have web sites ( the majority of us) but "WE" do expect to be able to discuss any subject/organisation relating to trading otherwise all "WE" get is the ET view of the trading world - pre paid of course.
It is idiotic that Baruck's journal was shut down. At least it contained interesting stuff. There are a few other threads that should be shut immediately, one asking if the market is coming down meanwhile it goes back and forth between Dr Trader and Waggie constantly putting each other down. That definitely belongs on Yahoo boards and should not be allowed to linger on ET. My observation , Moderators have spoilt many a good thread, and destroyed little bits of interesting stuff by cleaning up what "they" consider off topic. I admit moderating is not easy.