Yes, being able to freely critique a vendor on specific merits and demerits of their products and service offerings. I think we are on the same page here - its just that I feel that on ET it is more open to do that vis-a-vis BMT. I am not a die-hard critic of BMT, though I might appear to be from the way this thread has progressed. Refer my first post - I said - quoting directly from my first post: ""I personally think BMT banning policy is good - however I know a lot of very smart people get banned there - if they attack vendors. In this regard, ET is WAY BETTER."" I think the main message in this thread has got lost. Anyways, I have better things to do. If Baron/Mods wish - they can close this thread and we can all move on
Finally, you've just confirmed my suspicion, you're just ranting... You are requesting for people to talk about Patak without an apparent reason. Why would someone attack a vendor without a concrete reason for it? Are you mad?
BMT members that actually exist can easily be found with Google that way. I tested that with actual numbers taken from BMT. Just your alleged account... can't be found.
What the fuck. So you want to "attack" a vendor and expect not to get moderated? Are you serious? Listen to yourself man. You are losing it. You keep changing your argument. So now it went from simply "questioning" to openly attacking a paid sponsor. Why don't you try that here and see how far that gets you. You CANNOT openly attack PAID sponsors on ET. You can attack vendors who are NOT paid as Baron wants them to pony up the cash. That is what happened with Patak. You were able to slander them as well as me because they were NOT paid sponsors. Once they became sponsors, the moderators jumped in. Why is this so hard for you to understand? It's known in the business world as "pay to play". You are suppose to be mature enough not to ATTACK vendors or regular posters. What you should do is bring FACTS to the table in a respectful manner and not wild conspiracy theories.
No, I am not mad if that gives you comfort. I mentioned Patak because a lot of people (including myself) have raised questions on true business practice of patak on ET and we had huge long debates. I have made my point on this thread. Some people might agree, some might not agree. Whatever.
Dude, I am tired after a long hard day in the markets. I should have been careful in my typing. Change "attack" to "question". Whatever. Relax.
LMAO, I guess me an my alleged accounts are safe then... bud, the reality is... I couldnt care less... I've managed to pass the time while on this conference call with this very entertaining thread... but what I stated is still true... be rude on BMT, you get banned... which is what happened to me.. so which part of my arguments are you disagreeing with... or is it the "prove that you existed there" part that you are still hung up on and has you spinning cycles... LOL...
Mods, Can you please close this thread? I think this thread has served its purpose in the sense that it has presented both sides of the picture before forum members. I have made my points very clear. Also, I hope as a result of this thread Big Mike will be more careful with the way he deals with discussion on his site in the future. It is only good for various forum members rights in the free world. Thanks.
But that's the problem and you proved my point. You don't question, you ATTACK. That is what you do. You ATTACKED me, you ATTACKED Patak. I'm sure BMT has the same code of conduct policies that ET has. So what is the point of this thread again. Let's just agree, that if you attack any "paid" vendor, anywhere, that behavior is going to be stopped. That is why vendors "pay". You never raise questions. You come up with wild conspiracy theories and pass them off as facts. If I call someone out, I bring facts to the table. I quote actual posts word for word and provide a link. I use actual numbers. I make a solid argument. Instead of just calling some vendor a scam because I don't like their business model.