Posted by wouldtic on 17th of May 2011 at 12:53 pm
That would be the best approach and avoid difficulties with
language and re-explaining. Pin it right at the top of the
blog where it couldn't be missed!
Posted by parkridge77 on 17th of May 2011 at 01:22 pm
Agree on the table idea-- great idea - minimize confusion &
save Matt time & headaches, too ! We'll get there
& in the green, too !
One of the greatest challenges for me is to just follow the
system- wins, losses, draws & all. But that is what I
signed up for, along with the big picture of the amazing stats over
a period of time.
Also-- I totally understand those that misunderstood or
were thrown by Matt's directions, causing some 2nd guessing &
doubts. I would hope we can be a supportive community to one
another & to Matt as we iron this out.
I was single entry-- butthe use of "otherwise" did throw
me, too. It is now clear to me that Matt meant to say "
irregardless." So yes, English does matter in tyring to
follow Matt's system to the letter ! & maybe a table could
smooth out that wrinkle nicely. Onward !
1. There should be
ONE PLACEwhere
recommendations are made - (is this what "current trade" was
supposed to be?) so that when there is pressure - before the close
etc. - you need to go to one place only and see the recommendation.
The recommendation there needs to be simple and crystal clear - I
don't see why is it not possible to write one or two sentences of
short, concise instructions that anyone can understand, with no
ambiguities, and in a point form - not conversational. (Why is it
even necessary to say anything about the multiple-entry system in
the single-entry area? Perhaps the should be only one place for
both since what's the point of putting the same message in both
places? (redundancy means imperfect design).
2.When a trade is announced, it is very obvious that people
are going to start asking questions immediately. Matt & Co.
need be on top of these questions and answer them
immediately- on
this forum or elsewhere - and ALL OTHER PEOPLE SHOULD REFRAIN FROM
ANSWERING QUESTIONS since if me or you start answering it just adds
to the general confusion - we are now offering
OPINIONSwhen what
is required are
ANSWERS. The
format of these answers also needs to be crystal clear, and use a
simple format such as the FAQ - without all the elements of the
forum i.e. "reply" "comments" etc. - no need to click extra buttons
to see more etc. - just Q, A, Q, A, etc. so that people can read
these quickly and see what's going on - this will also cut on the
number of Q's since as we see here people are asking about stuff
that has already been answered earlier since they can not eassily
see the previous exchanges. Perhaps this Q&A can be conducted
in the same "one place" as the recommendation?
Matt & Co. are trying to do the right thing - it's not
easy! I know they will be reading these suggestions here and
hopefully will consider some of them. They are trying something
which has never been tried before here, and it is obvious that
there sre problems and they will be solved. In retrospect, I think
it would have been wise to run a Beta test of all this - perhaps
next time.
Posted by parkridge77 on 17th of May 2011 at 01:58 pm
haha- yep Perthx-good point ! &
thnx it is non-standard- double negative for
emphasis- thought to be irrespective + regardless. Only shows
how tricky it all can be-- just another VOTE for a table !
Can't wait to get our next signal myself- hold my hand if I
misinterpet it, OK?! thanx- good info & appreciate
Newsletter
Subscribe to our email list for regular free market updates
as well as a chance to get coupons!
Totally agree ascr
Posted by wouldtic on 17th of May 2011 at 12:53 pm
That would be the best approach and avoid difficulties with language and re-explaining. Pin it right at the top of the blog where it couldn't be missed!
Don't worry, we'll get this!!!
Agree on the table idea--
Posted by parkridge77 on 17th of May 2011 at 01:22 pm
Agree on the table idea-- great idea - minimize confusion & save Matt time & headaches, too ! We'll get there & in the green, too !
One of the greatest challenges for me is to just follow the system- wins, losses, draws & all. But that is what I signed up for, along with the big picture of the amazing stats over a period of time.
Also-- I totally understand those that misunderstood or were thrown by Matt's directions, causing some 2nd guessing & doubts. I would hope we can be a supportive community to one another & to Matt as we iron this out.
I was single entry-- butthe use of "otherwise" did throw me, too. It is now clear to me that Matt meant to say " irregardless." So yes, English does matter in tyring to follow Matt's system to the letter ! & maybe a table could smooth out that wrinkle nicely. Onward !
Table and other suggestions
Posted by pdani on 17th of May 2011 at 03:13 pm
1. There should be ONE PLACEwhere recommendations are made - (is this what "current trade" was supposed to be?) so that when there is pressure - before the close etc. - you need to go to one place only and see the recommendation. The recommendation there needs to be simple and crystal clear - I don't see why is it not possible to write one or two sentences of short, concise instructions that anyone can understand, with no ambiguities, and in a point form - not conversational. (Why is it even necessary to say anything about the multiple-entry system in the single-entry area? Perhaps the should be only one place for both since what's the point of putting the same message in both places? (redundancy means imperfect design).
2.When a trade is announced, it is very obvious that people are going to start asking questions immediately. Matt & Co. need be on top of these questions and answer them immediately- on this forum or elsewhere - and ALL OTHER PEOPLE SHOULD REFRAIN FROM ANSWERING QUESTIONS since if me or you start answering it just adds to the general confusion - we are now offering OPINIONSwhen what is required are ANSWERS. The format of these answers also needs to be crystal clear, and use a simple format such as the FAQ - without all the elements of the forum i.e. "reply" "comments" etc. - no need to click extra buttons to see more etc. - just Q, A, Q, A, etc. so that people can read these quickly and see what's going on - this will also cut on the number of Q's since as we see here people are asking about stuff that has already been answered earlier since they can not eassily see the previous exchanges. Perhaps this Q&A can be conducted in the same "one place" as the recommendation?
Matt & Co. are trying to do the right thing - it's not easy! I know they will be reading these suggestions here and hopefully will consider some of them. They are trying something which has never been tried before here, and it is obvious that there sre problems and they will be solved. In retrospect, I think it would have been wise to run a Beta test of all this - perhaps next time.
park, you realize, of course
Posted by perthx on 17th of May 2011 at 01:35 pm
the most accurate and proper use would not be "irregardless", but simply 'regardless'!!!
Ah such joy we have with semantics!!
haha- yep Perthx-good point ! & thnx
Posted by parkridge77 on 17th of May 2011 at 01:58 pm
haha- yep Perthx-good point ! & thnx it is non-standard- double negative for emphasis- thought to be irrespective + regardless. Only shows how tricky it all can be-- just another VOTE for a table ! Can't wait to get our next signal myself- hold my hand if I misinterpet it, OK?! thanx- good info & appreciate