URGENT question for Joe:

Discussion in 'Feedback' started by ghostzapper, Sep 6, 2008.

Is there something fishy going on in "trading" with the urgent message thread?

  1. Yes, lousy and biased moderation at its best

    5 vote(s)
    35.7%
  2. No, urgent message is a legit trading thread

    9 vote(s)
    64.3%
  1. Joe, I posted this in the "urgent mesage" thread, but ivan the terrible has deleted it, so I ask you in feedback..if you will disclose the aliases and shill names rennick is using in his thread. It seems only fair, but what do i know
    Please continue to keep your house clean by now disclosing rennicks shill aliases on this thread. Fair is fair!
     
  2. My remarks about this issue were deleted as well.

    Joe insists on "keeping his house clean", but Rennicks thread is the one making it dirty.

    The facts are the following:

    - Rennick is simply reposting information from a pay site that charges $200 a month. He isnt posting his own calls, but simply reposting from the pay site and not providing us with any new information.

    - Rennick has disclosed in the past the pay site's name, but now simply refers to it as the "ball site". People do email Rennick and then Rennick discloses the site's name over email.

    - Rennick has reposted this same thread over the years and ultimately it gets locked down by moderators. He has also posted on other trading sites this same thread and he was banned from a few of those sites.

    - Ivan insists that this thread is about trading. Yes, trading off of a pay site's calls and violating copyrights in the process.

    - Rennick is either advertising for the site (which is against ET's code of conduct) or violating copyright laws by reposting the calls. Rennick is either advertising the site with their permission or he doesnt have their permission and Elitetrader risks a lawsuit for copyright infringement:

    The pay site specifically has this disclaimer:
    "You may view, download, and print contents from the Service subject to the following conditions: (a) the content may be used solely for information purposes; (b) the content bear the proper attribution to; and (c) the content may not be modified or altered in any way. You may not republish, distribute, prepare derivative works, or otherwise use the content other than as explicitly permitted herein."

    "All content included on this site, such as text, graphics, logos, button icons, images, audio clips, digital downloads, data compilations, and software, is the property of or its content suppliers and protected by United States and international copyright laws. The compilation of all content on this site is the exclusive property of and protected by U.S. and international copyright laws. All software used on this site is the property of or its software suppliers and protected by United States and international copyright laws."

    Its up to you Joe. I have went ahead and forwarded links to Rennicks thread to the owners of the "ball site" for their review.
     
  3. Port, I agree with you here.

    I guess I have too much time on my hands, but i've been thinking about this. If rennick started the same thread in the journals 2 years ago, does it stand to reason that he has paid 2 years of services for the ball?

    $200 a month x 24 months = $5000 for the directional crap they are selling.

    I highly doubt rennick has paid them $5K, and that makes the scenario that he is pimping the site, in return for a substantial discount (or free) highly likely.

    Also, why is ivan the terrible and Joe so hot to post ip addresses of ball haters but are unwilling to disclose any aliases rennick may be using to help shill for his thread?

    The final decision is up to Joe and Baron, it's their call. If you ask me, but that's only if you ask me, rennick is playing Joe and Baron for fools.
     
  4. Why is rennick now using my name to lie about the win rate of the ball?

    If the thread is for fun, why is there a need to fudge the balls record this week?
    =============

    In case the following post is deleted from rennicks thread, here is my response to him. I believe I am allowed to respond when my name has been invoked by rennick, but ivan seems intent on running a crooked game so deletion of my response is very possible.

    I'm sorry rennick, you have invoked my name so I am allowed to respond.

    According to the criteria that I set up for you, the ball was 4 correct and 4 wrong for this week.

    Please do NOT use my name for the purposes of being inaccurate in favor of the ball. Thank you.
     
  5. Sorry Ghostzapper. Most of your posts are completely worthless and insulting, so sometimes I just see a post by you and delete it without bothering to read it.

    Sue me.

    You're right, however, I let you keep that one because he did call you out.
     
  6. Joe, why not ban these fuckers?
     

  7. Are you mad thornybird because rennick has more accounts than you do now ? LOL


    romeo
    james stock
    rubberbird
    thorn
    ghostzapper
     
  8. You forgot Mr Gates and Rowshans to that list.
     
  9. You're a moderator of a section of a message board. There's nothing to win in a lawsuit.
    It's Mr. Rowshan. row-shan. Do you understand puppet?
     
    #10     Sep 8, 2008