I couldn't give a toss if they still provide a good product and aren't engaged in totalitarian behaviour that is directly hurting people or limiting the freedom of others/their direct employees. The direct opposite of all the woke large corporations who subscribe to trendy social fashions but engage in awful things in their business practises e.g. a certain trainer manufacturer[s] using slave labour and at the same time pronouncing how good they are.
Take your business elsewhere if you don't like it. That's your right. Unlike large internet companies, you have plenty of providers to choose from. Good luck
The following 2 users say Thank You to Keab for this post:
I was reading through the SC response to a recent issue with their connection to the TT servers for their order routing service (totally distinct from the issues of this thread), and I realized that people often do a compartmentalization between different areas that concern them, and even seem like totally different people, depending on what they are talking about.
In purely technical areas, I find SC to be totally rational and impressively on point; on social and political issues where their personal points of view are activated, I, at least, find them bonkers. (Only my opinion, obviously.) On some issues that can be thought to straddle the technical and the personal, for example their frequent rants about Rithmic, CQG, Interactive Brokers, and others, there is sort of a bleed-in of the personal into the technical, where the technical part may be well-founded but the personal views (again, my opinion only) go somewhat on tilt, at least in the sense of overreaction.
I know, and have known, a number of people I get along fine with in some areas, but where I have to tiptoe around other areas, or change the subject. I imagine there are people who find this about me.
One question is always how far can I compartmentalize my own responses to these people. Can we stay friends and just talk about trading, or something else, say, what we're reading lately, or movies or something, and not get into the problem areas, or go there very gingerly. Sometimes this just doesn't work, sometimes it does.
I don't want to push this comparison too far, but it did help me to understand how I think about and relate to SC. I like them technically, and when they fly off the handle (in my opinion), I tune them out.
Others may not be willing to maintain this kind of compartmentalization, and it's not necessarily always easy for me either.
But this describes how I am handling the issues raised by their politics in this thread. If it doesn't affect the technical side, I can usually just shrug and ignore it. I realize that others may not be willing to, but it's how I am doing it. I think it's an individual matter, whether you do or don't.
Just my view. I don't insist on it for anyone else.
Bob.
When one door closes, another opens.
-- Cervantes, Don Quixote
The following 11 users say Thank You to bobwest for this post:
"And we remember when we started this thread, there were a few people on Futures I/O making fun of us and one broker who thought none of this was relevant. Well they have been proven 100% wrong and we have been proven 100% right. You can see we are intelligent and we have the foresight and we know what is going on. We want people to be strong and independent and self-sufficient and not be slaves to the system. Why would people want to be slaves, why would they want to think there is someone else smarter than them, and why would they want to give away their money to others or their power to others. It makes no sense. Be strong and independent. One should not believe in the false promises of communism and collectivism."
What's bizarre about not conforming to.collectivism which communism is most certainly part of?
Or is it only hypocritical multi national companies who are allowed to talk politics?
The following 3 users say Thank You to Keab for this post:
You guys do realize, that the more (redacted) people who exist that buy into the brainwashing, who lack the ability to think logically and who listen to what perceived authority figures say, literally means that the rest of us have more opportunity to extract money from markets?
These (redacted) people serve a purpose, and that is to be useful idiots, for creating volatility, whether it's political or financial (or both).
Weak minded people who lack the ability to think need coddled by their tribe in order to give themselves self worth, because outside of "omg how moral I am" , they aren't individuals, they aren't people, they are just emotionally insecure drones who lack the ability to think critically and logically.
Here is a good question... we're told to "trust the science" right? ... ok ... what is a key tenet of science... reproducibility right? .... ok... now explain to me the logic in "trusting the science" in which the government has deemed that "we don't allow YOU to perform THIS science... only people WE approve can do THIS science"
You can't. Nothing you can dance around will explain beyond that. Unless you want to admit that deep down you know that the largest % of humans truly are (redacted) (redacted) who would get themselves (injured) because they don't know what they're doing, in which case you're admitting you only want control over people, and not let people have freedom to make their own decisions.
This covid (redacted) only exists because Citi and Deutsche were about to entirely collapse
It's a hell of a lot easier to take control when you've brainwashed people into giving up their rights.
Some of you have been trained very well.
There are two teams in life, period:
1. You either want to be a little (redacted) and control other humans
2. Or you want to ensure that people are allowed to make their own decisions
Matriarchal society + written language = downfall of humanity
PS: I love Sierra Chart (regardless of whether we agree 100% or not)
