Jump to content

Welcome to the new Traders Laboratory! Please bear with us as we finish the migration over the next few days. If you find any issues, want to leave feedback, get in touch with us, or offer suggestions please post to the Support forum here.

  • Welcome Guests

    Welcome. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest which does not give you access to all the great features at Traders Laboratory such as interacting with members, access to all forums, downloading attachments, and eligibility to win free giveaways. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. Create a FREE Traders Laboratory account here.

Guest forsearch

Q: TL Policy on Spamming, Solicitation and Advertising by Members

Recommended Posts

Guest forsearch

Since at least one of the mods yesterday seemed to have a problem with interpreting and applying the TL rules with regards to solicitation and advertising by a non-TL sponsor (meaning a member who thought that he could spam TL with solicitations for "donations" for his new $500 course without being a paying TL sponsor), could you kindly update the community on the TL rules about spamming, solicitation and advertising?

 

Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll reply since I'm sure you're referring to me. There was no misinterpretation, upon asking a long term member in good standing I was told that James had approved the thread. End of discussion on that as far as I'm concerned. When things got out of hand I locked the thread down and PM'ed James to await his decision on the matter. It's his site, therefore it's not up the gander to publicly vote on what's good for the goose.

 

As a personal side note...I believe you mean well, but you're contant attempt to police TL has me on the verge of giving you an OCD diagnosis. :o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest forsearch
  MC said:

 

As a personal side note...I believe you mean well, but you're contant attempt to police TL has me on the verge of giving you an OCD diagnosis. :o

 

Nope, that's YOUR job, isn't it? :crap:

 

Just, send me a script for the meds instead and we'll call it even, OK? :rofl:

 

-fs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  forsearch said:
Nope, that's YOUR job, isn't it? :crap:

 

Just, send me a script for the meds instead and we'll call it even, OK? :rofl:

 

-fs

 

:haha:300_244971.jpg

 

There ya go...I don't want you to be the sad egg any longer ok.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest forsearch

Considering that the policy still hasn't been clarified for the benefit of TL members - and notwithstanding the specifics of this incident - could James let us all know, once and for all.

 

And also, if the "member in good standing" had told the mod that he had James's approval, then why was his "approved" thread DELETED and the member's signature line (which had a link to the $500 offending site) removed?

 

There's something not right about all of this, since if that's the case, why isn't there a demerit on that member's file as a result?

 

As they said in Animal Farm: All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.

 

Shame....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My though is if a long standing member who contributes often decided to post a link to a project they had been working on (such as a pay service) I would not have a problem with that. Now don't get me wrong. If it got to the point in which evertyone was posting things like that , well then a more severe set of rules would have to be kept to. It does not seem to happen a lot here. On the other had when you have a brans new profile sending up links to services it becomes very clear what's going on and the mods take care of that fairly quick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  stanlyd said:
My though is if a long standing member who contributes often decided to post a link to a project they had been working on (such as a pay service) I would not have a problem with that. Now don't get me wrong. If it got to the point in which evertyone was posting things like that , well then a more severe set of rules would have to be kept to. It does not seem to happen a lot here. On the other had when you have a brans new profile sending up links to services it becomes very clear what's going on and the mods take care of that fairly quick.

 

Thanks for recognizing what I meant by "member in good standing", and backing the mods...we all thank you. If this was a 2 post noob we would have shut that down instantly and permabanned without blinking. When someone has provided value and great input for a considerable amount of time I feel we should ask the question about approval. Beyond that we can only use our judgment at that time and notify James who has the final say. Often a mod is only here to contain the damage and then notify the admin with higher decision making power. That's how most jobs work as well...things move up the chain of command. The 1st level is not the end all be all typically.

 

Plus, James is not here for a quick buck and holds the highest level of integrity IMO. Give James some friggin credit here guys, it's not like he's harboring a murderer or laundering money. He won't let you guys down or allow TL to become a grounds for...well let's just say this won't become a T2W scenario. :o

 

Some of those complaining have concepts that would work well in a vacuum, but this is a dynamic environment and all posters are NOT created equal. Life's not fair, the market is not fair and those with a clean track record are innocent until proven guilty in my eyes. If you have a bad track record or NO track record, mods should give just enough rope to hang with. ;)

 

Gnite fellaz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  forsearch said:
Considering that the policy still hasn't been clarified for the benefit of TL members - and notwithstanding the specifics of this incident - could James let us all know, once and for all.

 

And also, if the "member in good standing" had told the mod that he had James's approval, then why was his "approved" thread DELETED and the member's signature line (which had a link to the $500 offending site) removed?

 

There's something not right about all of this, since if that's the case, why isn't there a demerit on that member's file as a result?

 

As they said in Animal Farm: All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.

 

Shame....

 

Untitled-11.jpg

 

Here ya go tiger, knock yourself out. You are now a deputy of TL. :o ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

Ill write a follow up but currently off from the desk so will make this brief. After consideration and feedbacks from members of TL, I have decided to implement a zero tolerance policy for promotion/ad/spam on the forum. As much as I think it would be creative to allow members to promote their works, these can lead to disastrous outcomes and the future of TL may be affected by it.

 

Therefore, until there are more requests regarding solicitation from loyal members I will not allow this on the boards. In the future, we may decide to implement some creative solution.

 

For now, I am considering adding a donation button per user. This way those who benefit and want to give back in return can simply donate. Not sure how effective this is but it is still in talks at the moment.

 

I should have more updates shortly. Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  forsearch said:
Considering that the policy still hasn't been clarified for the benefit of TL members - and notwithstanding the specifics of this incident - could James let us all know, once and for all.

 

And also, if the "member in good standing" had told the mod that he had James's approval, then why was his "approved" thread DELETED and the member's signature line (which had a link to the $500 offending site) removed?

 

There's something not right about all of this, since if that's the case, why isn't there a demerit on that member's file as a result?

 

thats not the mods fault.. simply my miscommunication with the mods to resolve this problem swiftly. Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest forsearch
  Soultrader said:
Hi,

 

Ill write a follow up but currently off from the desk so will make this brief. After consideration and feedbacks from members of TL, I have decided to implement a zero tolerance policy for promotion/ad/spam on the forum. As much as I think it would be creative to allow members to promote their works, these can lead to disastrous outcomes and the future of TL may be affected by it.

 

Therefore, until there are more requests regarding solicitation from loyal members I will not allow this on the boards. In the future, we may decide to implement some creative solution.

 

For now, I am considering adding a donation button per user. This way those who benefit and want to give back in return can simply donate. Not sure how effective this is but it is still in talks at the moment.

 

I should have more updates shortly. Thanks.

 

Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably the safest and most unambiguous way to go. Of course Walter had become a good efriend to a lot of us so understandable to cut some slack. Walter, I hope that you aren't too busy to come and hang out here now and then! Good luck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree. I don't envy James or the mods for situations like this. It can be tough making judgment calls. You can't please everyone all of the time, as much as I'm sure they would like.

 

So far as I have seen, Walter's conversations have been nothing but intellectual. He deserves a significant amount of credit given his contributions in the past, even though I personally did not agree with the way he was presenting his course. But hey, it shouldn't hurt to test the limits now and then. It keeps the mods on their toes and helps strengthen the integrity of the web site. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for all the responses. Although I may reconsider implementing something like this in the future, I will leave this issue as closed.

 

I will re-open this thread once we have a few things that may be implemented to receive further feedback. For now, any promotion will not be allowed on TL. Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • TDUP ThredUp stock, watch for a top of range breakout above 2.94 at https://stockconsultant.com/?TDUP
    • TDUP ThredUp stock, watch for a top of range breakout above 2.94 at https://stockconsultant.com/?TDUP
    • NFLX Netflix stock watch, local support and resistance areas at 838.12 and 880.5 at https://stockconsultant.com/?NFLX
    • Date: 8th April 2025.   Markets Rebound Cautiously as US-China Tariff Tensions Deepen     Global markets staged a tentative recovery on Tuesday following a wave of volatility sparked by escalating trade tensions between the United States and China. The Asia-Pacific region showed signs of stability after a chaotic start to the week—though some pockets remained under pressure. Taiwan’s Taiex dropped 4.4%, dragged lower by losses in tech heavyweight TSMC. The world’s largest chipmaker fell another 4% on Tuesday and has now slumped 13.5% since April 2, when US President Donald Trump first unveiled what he called ‘Liberation Day’ tariffs.   However, broader sentiment across the region turned more positive, with several markets rebounding sharply after Monday’s dramatic sell-offs. Japan’s Nikkei 225 surged over 6% in early trading, rebounding from an 18-month low. South Korea’s Kospi rose marginally, and Australia’s ASX 200 gained 1.9%, driven by strength in mining stocks. Hong Kong’s Hang Seng rose 1.6%, though still far from recovering from Monday’s 13.2% crash—its worst day since the 1997 Asian financial crisis. China’s Shanghai Composite added 0.9%.   In Europe, DAX and FTSE 100 are up more than 1% in opening trade. EU Commission President von der Leyen repeated yesterday that the EU had offered reciprocal zero tariffs on manufactured goods previously and continues to stand by that offer. Others are also trying again to talk to Trump to get some sort of agreement that limits the impact.   Much of the rally appeared to be driven by dip-buying, as well as hopes that the intensifying trade war could still be defused through negotiations.   China Strikes Back: ‘We Will Fight to the End’   Tensions reached a boiling point after Trump threatened to impose an additional 50% tariff on all Chinese imports unless Beijing rolled back its retaliatory measures by April 8. ‘If China does not withdraw its 34% increase above their already long-term trading abuses by tomorrow... the United States will impose additional tariffs on China of 50%,’ Trump declared on social media.   If implemented, the new tariffs would bring total US duties on Chinese goods to a staggering 124%, factoring in the existing 20%, the 34% recently announced, and the proposed 50%.   In response, China’s Ministry of Commerce issued a stern warning, stating: ‘The US threat to escalate tariffs is a mistake on top of a mistake... If the US insists on its own way, China will fight to the end.’ The ministry also called for equal and respectful dialogue, though signs of compromise on either side remain scarce.   Beijing acted quickly to contain a market fallout. State funds intervened to support equities, and the People’s Bank of China set the yuan fixing at its weakest level since September 2023 to boost export competitiveness. Additionally, five-year interest rate swaps in China fell to their lowest levels since 2020, indicating potential for further monetary easing.   Trump Talks Tough on EU Too   Trump’s hardline approach extended beyond China. Speaking at a press conference, he rejected the European Union’s offer to eliminate tariffs on cars and industrial goods, accusing the bloc of ‘being very bad to us.’ He insisted that Europe would need to source its energy from the US, claiming the US could ‘knock off $350 billion in one week.’   The EU, meanwhile, backed away from a proposed 50% retaliatory tariff on American whiskey, opting instead for 25% duties on selected US goods in response to Trump’s steel and aluminium tariffs.     Volatile Wall Street Adds to the Drama   Wall Street experienced wild swings on Monday as investors processed the rapidly evolving trade conflict. The S&P 500 briefly fell 4.7% before rebounding 3.4%, nearly erasing its losses in what could have been its biggest one-day jump in years—if it had held. The Dow Jones Industrial Average sank by as much as 1,700 points early in the day but later climbed nearly 900 points before closing 349 points lower, down 0.9%. The Nasdaq ended up 0.1%.   The brief rally was fueled by a false rumour that Trump was considering a 90-day pause on tariffs—rumours that the White House quickly labelled ‘fake news.’ The market's sharp reaction underscored how desperate investors are for any sign that tensions might ease.   Oil Markets in Focus: Goldman Sachs Revises Forecasts   Crude prices also reflected the uncertainty, with US crude briefly dipping below $60 per barrel for the first time since 2021. As of early Tuesday, Brent crude was trading at $64.72, while WTI hovered around $61.26.   Goldman Sachs, in a note dated April 7, lowered its average price forecasts for Brent and WTI through 2025 and 2026, citing mounting recession risks and the potential for higher-than-expected supply from OPEC+.       Under a base-case scenario where the US avoids a recession and tariffs are reduced significantly before the April 9 implementation date, Goldman sees Brent at $62 per barrel and WTI at $58 by December 2025. These figures fall further to $55 and $51, respectively, by the end of 2026. This outlook also assumes moderate output increases from eight OPEC+ countries, with incremental boosts of 130,000–140,000 barrels per day in June and July.   However, should the US slip into a typical recession and OPEC production aligns with the bank’s baseline assumptions, Brent could retreat to $58 by the end of this year and to $50 by December 2026.   In a more bearish scenario involving a global GDP slowdown and no change to OPEC+ output levels, Brent prices might fall to $54 by year-end and $45 by late 2026. The most extreme projection—based on a simultaneous economic downturn and a full reversal of OPEC+ production cuts—would see Brent plunge to below $40 per barrel by the end of 2026.   Goldman noted that oil prices could outperform forecasts significantly if there was a dramatic shift in tariff policy and a surprise in global demand recovery.   Cautious Optimism, But Warnings Persist   With both Washington and Beijing showing no signs of backing down, markets are likely to remain volatile in the days ahead. Investors now turn their attention to upcoming trade meetings and policy decisions, hoping for clarity in what has become one of the most unpredictable trading environments in recent years.   Always trade with strict risk management. Your capital is the single most important aspect of your trading business.   Please note that times displayed based on local time zone and are from time of writing this report. Click HERE to access the full HFM Economic calendar.   Want to learn to trade and analyse the markets? Join our webinars and get analysis and trading ideas combined with better understanding of how markets work. Click HERE to register for FREE!   Click HERE to READ more Market news.   Andria Pichidi HFMarkets   Disclaimer: This material is provided as a general marketing communication for information purposes only and does not constitute an independent investment research. Nothing in this communication contains, or should be considered as containing, an investment advice or an investment recommendation or a solicitation for the purpose of buying or selling of any financial instrument. All information provided is gathered from reputable sources and any information containing an indication of past performance is not a guarantee or reliable indicator of future performance. Users acknowledge that any investment in Leveraged Products is characterized by a certain degree of uncertainty and that any investment of this nature involves a high level of risk for which the users are solely responsible and liable. We assume no liability for any loss arising from any investment made based on the information provided in this communication. This communication must not be reproduced or further distributed without our prior written permission.
    • CVNA Carvana stock watch, rebound to 166.56 support area at https://stockconsultant.com/?CVNA
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.