The issue with 2 is no one will ever know what has been deleted or banned from the thread---allowing false profits and demogogues to rule the site.
OK. I'm an Engineer by training and a Systems Guy. ( but I like to party ). I have four technical rules-based criteria that need to be satisfied before a client enters a position. Furthermore, I insist that my clients create a stop-loss level and a profit target at the time of trade entry ( yes I provide rules about where to set them ). For untrained traders, discretion is disaster. And clients losing money is bad business. In that spirit, Baron, with all due respect, this needs to be tightened up. You are essentially telling the State of New York that effective immediately they can Open Carry Weapons without a permit. Maybe the wiser solution was for Baron to have a progressive set of rules set for OP's. Some ideas: 1. OP's can block personal insults and value statements. 2. If an alternative viewpoint is expressed in a polite, professional manner - it stands. 3. Posts with technical merit stand 4. Posts with technical information disputed by the OP are allowed to stand if the OP cannot prove the information defective with subsequent posts. Just thinking out loud.
Or we could just see what happens over a few weeks. There seems to be an impression amongst a few that there will be widespread blocking, expressed primarily by those who are most likely to be blocked. Shocking. Playtime's over. No one left to stick pins in. No more kicking one's feet and turning red. Reminds me of all the hand-wringing when schools were integrated. I've debated dozens of people in my journals and threads. Argued with many of them. How many people do I have on my Ignore list? Four. Those who just won't let it go. Who keep on, week after week, month after month, year after year. And I'm supposed to let all this slide because "that's the way ET is"? Bullshit. Civil discourse is not a root canal. Those failed traders who insist on taking out their hostilities on others just to make themselves feel better -- which it never does, otherwise they'd eventually stop -- need therapy, not a platform. And for those who just can't adapt, there's always Yahoo.
This isn't a fair statement. Off the top of my head I can think of 4 immediate people who expressed concerns (I'm sure I'm forgetting others): Myself, bone, JTrades, and Surf. I don't think of my posts as typically trolling or baiting for the most part so I don't think I'd be most likely to be blocked. I also don't think bone or JTrades would meet that either. For obvious reasons I think Surf could be categorized as someone prone to be blocked from certain threads simply based on existing battles - but the *vast majority* of people who brought up concerns here are *not* people who actually say things to get themselves blocked on a consistent basis. I'm not thinking of how it will benefit me I'm thinking of how it may adversely affect the flow of the site. You seem to be gunning for it based on how it will benefit you but I haven't seen you speak on the potential negatives of it. Once again - there is no gun at your head telling you to debate these people. Stop debating people so much.
I suggested this feature back in Jan. 2014. Just goes to show that ya gotta be patient! Thank you , Baron [Option to delete that x?#!+*x& learner2007, Jan 21, 2014 I wonder if it would be possible and desirable to give the starter of the thread the right to delete postings that ruin his thread. And for the reader, it's no fun when all too often in a thread you have to scroll through post after post of two guys arguing over who has the bigger ding-dong.]
A. The "vast majority" of a handful of people doesn't add up to much. B. I don't see any potential negatives. There were a half dozen of us at TL with responsibilities for various forums and nobody ever complained. The owner thought it was great. C. I'd be happy to stop debating people -- both of them -- if they'd stop trying to hijack my threads. It's not an unreasonable expectation. The young can be excused to some extent, at least temporarily. The middle-aged have no excuse (arrested development is not an excuse).
Well sure it's not an adequate sample size - but to imply that everyone arguing against it were the prime candidates for it to be used on was simply not the case at all. Surely you must recognize the the fact that you were on the benefitting side there. This is how we end up with crappy laws and excessive control of things - by one group not seeing how it's a problem because it benefits them directly. Two way street. You're saying you'd be happy to stop debating if people would stop hijacking. They continue to hijack because you continue to debate. Both sides have involvement here. By debating them you're validating their presence as input important enough for you to recognize. While that's a good thing to not outright dismiss people just because you might not like what they say, the specific interaction between you and Surf has been going on in multiple threads with baiting going on from both sides. In fact you dropped a little turd in Surf's thread without him even saying anything to you by the 4th page in: http://www.elitetrader.com/et/index...-short-shake-shack.291104/page-4#post-4115539 Your next reply was then another unprovoked stab at Surf: http://www.elitetrader.com/et/index...short-shake-shack.291104/page-13#post-4124638 I get it, Surf almost knowingly invites this type of stuff and is used to it at this point so it's almost not thought of as hijacking but it's the same damn thing he does to you so you're just as wrong here. I think it would be lame to come up with new censorship controls simply because you and Surf can't stop arguing with each other. Surf thinks PA is BS, I think he's wrong but I don't go on a crusade to prove it to him every time he reminds people of it nor do I comment on price drivers either. C'mon, there's probably less than 8 active troublemakers even present on the forum and they all have their own little interests. The site is not exactly a trollfest as it's made out to be and the regular axe grinders are easily self-dismissed if they're just talking nonsense. If people have beefs in their journals they should simply report it to a mod and let the mod deal with it. They'll know what trolling is from simple smack talking and the site won't turn into a police state controlled by some clique. I bet if one were to graph the amount of diverse posters per day on ET they'd see peaks and troughs near every major market build up and correction with a drop in traffic being more tied to people getting blown out of trading rather than everyone getting butt-hurt by threads and leaving. The site isn't *that* hardcore.
I don't know that allowing the monkeys to dictate terms of the asylum is prudent We (collectively) can either focus on the positive..., and constructive..., or we can focus on the negative..., and destructive We can't do both - effectively imo of course - you're the sheriff - I'm here by your efforts and graces In db's case - anyone questioning him / calling him out - is labeled a "troll" I'm sure other's - who can't hang - will also adopt this tact In any case - I'm simply a monkey As always - appreciate your efforts..., and this site RN
It is clear that there is a big problem on ET. People cannot write anything anymore without being attacked. What is most worrying is that these attacks are not based on scientifically knowledge but rather on what I call "terrorist behavior". The tactic is that people should be terrorized so that they stop posting. That's why postings like this appear everywhere and are countless: Why should people be motivated to post on ET in response to these idiots? The answer: you only respond if you are an idiot yourself. For the simple reason that people are always attracted by people who have the same (lack of) intelligence. So whatever the solution that will be implemented, I personally will never ever again post anything valuable or not valuable concerning trading systems on ET. On top of that I trade, so I don't have time to post continuously when markets are open. General rule is that the level of performance in trading is inversely proportional to the number of postings. The fact that there are already a lot of threads and hundreds of postings about the problem of trolls, says a lot about the people trolling on ET. Trolls say it is impossible to predict in trading, but I will predict now the reaction of the trolls to this posting: insults and parts of postings that will be taken out of context will appear again. All this will only confirm what I posted. Baron wrote: I think the member base is intelligent enough.. The fact that we are having this discussion proofs just the opposite. If there would be (a minimum) of intelligence, there would be no problem. ET becomes more and more Elite Trolling.
The problem is that claims are not being backed by anything but more claims and when these claims are challenged you lot, like children, go into sulk mode, branding the ones that challenge you as trolls. My advice would be to not make any claims you can not back up with some sort of actual evidence. Simples!