Welcome to NexusFi: the best trading community on the planet, with over 150,000 members Sign Up Now for Free
Genuine reviews from real traders, not fake reviews from stealth vendors
Quality education from leading professional traders
We are a friendly, helpful, and positive community
We do not tolerate rude behavior, trolling, or vendors advertising in posts
We are here to help, just let us know what you need
You'll need to register in order to view the content of the threads and start contributing to our community. It's free for basic access, or support us by becoming an Elite Member -- see if you qualify for a discount below.
-- Big Mike, Site Administrator
(If you already have an account, login at the top of the page)
I posted the BetterRenko source/dll on the Sierra site, and linked to it from nexusfi.com (formerly BMT) on the SC custom bar thread. So which model is better?
Can you help answer these questions from other members on NexusFi?
Why don't these people send the source to the moderators who can compile it and post it ?
I will never install a DLL from an untrusted source. Almost every day big name brokers get fined by the NFA because they cheat on their customers, why would the complete training / indicator selling industry be 'trustworthy' then ?
@aslan, you can post the DLL here. Posting it on an external site just makes things more complicated.
@MetalTrade, no - sending to moderators is not an option. Moderators are not going to put an official label on something as 'safe' by posting it when it wasn't there content to begin with. As I said in my first few posts, DLL's are now allowed here. Obfuscated DLL's are not. Posting DLL's without source should be frowned upon, and you -- the users -- should call out anyone that posts a DLL without posting the source. There is either a good reason for it, or there isn't.
I can't really see a reason for posting a DLL without source. If you are posting something such as a gauge that is closed source, does one really have the right to post it? Most closed source DLL's cannot be freely re-posted.
Yes, my stance remains that I strongly dislike DLL's. The few that exist on the site today were against my strong protest.
It started originally with @timmyb, who required a DLL because there was no other way to bundle some core components. It was not obfuscated and prohibiting the DLL would have caused the project to stop being shared on nexusfi.com (formerly BMT).
It then went to @Fat Tails, if I recall. @Fat Tails has an excellent reputation on the forum as probably the single best nexusfi.com (formerly BMT) member. Was I thrilled to see him posting obfuscated code on the site? No, absolutely not. But the choice is basically this: Tell @Fat Tails to not post that code, which would then piss off a ton of users who want those indicators --- or let him do it, but encourage him to minimize it. I've done the later, and I think it is fine.
At some point, Felton Trading started posting his DLL's, and I originally pulled them off the site and told him to stop. Then here came the uprising from the users who wanted "MOAR INDICATORS!!!!" so they were allowed to remain. Eventually he was permanently banned and all his stuff deleted from the forum, so that is moot now and off-topic.
Later we had @Erez start posting DLL's. This one caught me by surprise, it was on the site for months before someone reported it to me. At this point, @Erez had become a bit of a super star in @perryg's thread, and if I had deleted the indicators there would have been a backlash from the users - because again, just like @Fat Tails, they just want the indicator and don't care how they get it.
As a general rule, I do not want and will not allow new DLL's on the site. If an exception is going to be made, it is going to require that user have contributed to nexusfi.com (formerly BMT) heavily with predominantly open source code, and that the user have an excellent reputation.
If I am made aware of a DLL on the forum, the first response will be for me to delete it unless I have explicitly approved it already as an "exception". Understand this does not mean I think it is safe or that I have vetted the file, which I will not and have not done (since I don't even use Ninja for my charts).
My bottom line recommendation is that users should demand open source code. But unfortunately, users just want the indicators...
If you want to do something about it, then you, the users, need to encourage Fat Tails and Erez to post open code, along with anyone else.
