Hi Bobwest,

Sorry about disturbing,
and OK, I already have an own trading journal since almost a year,

2tenor, DAX, 2h candles and 3MA system Hi fellow traders, Just registered here, and decided to start a trading journal. My goals is to get some discussion about my system and similar type of trading systems, for mutual benefit of all of us. I am presently trading part-time, because of typical …

< edit: should I delete my previous post, or is it OK? >

Agree 100%. After reading a lot of these posts, it's apparent that many people don't have all the facts or have the facts misunderstood.

I also noticed that yesterday, the poll was staying pretty consintent right around 60/40 in favor of lifting the ban. Then rather quickly, it swung to 48/52 in favor of keeping the ban. Is there any chance that someone is making fake accounts to alter the vote? Or are new members prevented from voting? Just curious because it seems odd that it changed so abruptly.

stop chasing vendors of any kind

Mike

I agree with your point, many do, it would be great if it was that easy.

There are so many problems with proof of proof that it becomes the next level joke. Plus traders have runs of luck, funds have runs of luck, how many days/weeks/months do they have to show profit, is it continuous/every day/every week. What about different styles of trading.

And look at the car industry as a great regulated example of giving 'proof' - consumption figures and emissions standards !!!!! <- deliberate overuse here.

At the end of the day there is only one way, learning to become responsible for ourselves and our own good and bad decisions and then moving on.

Cheers

You are right, they can fake their statements. Two points.
.
1) Showing their brokerage statements would be the minimum standard. It would have to be over a reasonable period including draw downs and all. If they cannot even do that then Pass.

2) 99% of these Trading Room can not show anything. They never trade live!!!! Emmett will ask these con artist to show 3 months of brokerage statements and they can not do it and then he ask them to show 1 month and they cannot even do that. Heck I remember him asking one Trading Room if they could even show a single day they traded live and they could not even do that. This industry is so corrupt, most of these Trading Room would not be able to show any proof of profitable trading even over a short period where they might have lucked out. This minimum filter, which as you pointed out should be easy to met, they cannot. As most are out and out frauds that never trade a live account. That is how sad it is.

Ironically, @Big Mike published several months of real-time results, with daily broker confirmations and monthly statements, and was not believed by some, even though he is a known quantity here, with no financial ax to grind.



Bob.

I am a strong @Big Mike partisan. I have seen his intense efforts to keep this forum clean over a span of many years, and my hat's off to him.

There is no practicality in demanding "proof" of anything. We have seen extremely clever and effective faking over the years, in statements and even videos of supposed trades. Because of the obvious motive, vendors will give anything a try, and often will be believed.

Ironically, @Big Mike published several months of real-time results, with daily broker confirmations and monthly statements, and was not believed by some, even though he is a known quantity here, with no financial ax to grind.

As to how decisions should be made, I am OK with Mike's judgment and experience. I do know that he is open to reconsidering his decisions based on evidence, and have seen him do it. (He's doing it now.) I also think he is right most of the time, and someone does have to decide, one way or the other.

I am a little sorry now that this present question has been put to vote. I agree that the situation has some complexity, and there may be circumstances that need to be weighed. I made my vote, and I am unsure if I was right or wrong -- which is the problem. This probably should not be put to the membership, because of the possibility of uninformed voting, both pro and con, and the simple fact that our instincts have not been sharpened by years of being on the job of keeping the forum safe. It is too likely that votes will be made based on emotional or other reasons, being for or against Alex on fairly weak grounds, instead of experienced consideration. Of course, many, probably most, will do their honest best to get it right.

I'll accept the poll outcome, on the hope that the community's judgment will turn out to be right. I do hope that this is the last such experiment, however. I'll take Mike's judgment and fundamental fairness over a membership poll any day.

With all that said, since it has been put to vote, anyone who does have a view should register it, so the odds of a good decision are increased by the additional participation.

Bob.

I think they do not show statements, even fake ones, because IF they were to show fake statements, they would be prosecuted by SEC then. But until then, there is nothing really they can do about them. At least right now I think.

You can not be prosecuted for showing genuine brokerage statements as long as you are not doing something fraudulent like showing a fake track record over 3 months and stating this is his performance and only showing winning statement and none of the losers. They prosecute for committing fraud. One of the scams these guys use is to say they cannot show statements because of the regulators. That is con artist talk. The first thing the regulators will want to see are brokerage statements. Fraud is what is illegal. Open honest transparency is what is desired.

Exactly my point!