Forum Replies Created
- Posts
I agree. The FF brand could be damaged by their actions. This is a risk that they certainly considered, but maybe they underestimated the reaction.
Don’t mistake my observations as some kind of approval. I don’t agree with the FF decisions. I think the logic used by FF is directly connected to money and to maintaining that very significant revenue stream. Did brokers object to certain threads and contributors? I don’t think we’ll ever know. I don’t think so. Maybe their actions were caused by a number of misguided concerns. They certainly want to protect their brand. The lack of a response from FF moderators/owners suggests that they aren’t interested in explanations. As far as the law, I’m unaware of any US law that would prohibit FF, a privately held company, from banning a user who has violated its purported code of conduct.
I have to agree with stevepatt. The FF website generates millions every year for its owners. Take a look at the stats. Obviously they will do whatever they feel is necessary to protect that revenue. Really, there are only two reasons that would lead to a ban. Stevepatt covered the first. Regardless of the system or the concept, most traders will fail to apply it successfully. So why would brokers be worried? A more likely scenario for a ban is any suspicious activity (great or small or barely existent or even imaginary) that might tarnish the FF brand and in turn hurt revenue. Does this mean that the owners were/are always right? No. They don’t have to be. They decide who can participate on their free site. Thankfully, there are other sites, such as this one, and other people, like Saver0, that provide traders with forums to discuss a wide range of issues/ideas.
