No 'forced' trade to gain 'Trading Privileges'kết quả bình chọn
No 'forced' trade to gain 'Trading Privileges'Thảo luận
Nov 30, 2009 at 13:33
2,158Lượt xem
10 Replies
Tham gia từ Aug 17, 2009
24bài viết
Nov 30, 2009 at 13:33
Guys. As much as I love the site and the work you are doing on it, I have to say that requiring us to make a trade with a specific comment in order to gain the 'Trading Privileges' verification has not been thorougly thought out.
I had no problem providing my investor password so you could verify the trades I have uploaded. Excellent idea to counteract fack uploads.
I had no problem running an EA to further confirm the trades are legitamite ... EVEN THOUGH the source code for this EA is not apparently available and so I cannot verify what you are actually able to do in this EA. Trust goes both ways. I have no problem with this EA because I can simply enable 'ask manual confirmtion' to know it wont place any trades and I know enough about MQ4 to know there is no information it can send to you that could put my account at risk.
But forcing us to make a trade with a specific comment ... to far!
Did you consider simply using your existing EA to verify the ability to trade? There is a very basic function in MQ4 called 'IsTradeAllowed' that can verify the person who is running the EA has trading privileges for that account. Sure, it may return the odd FALSE if the trade context is busy etc, but at some stage (most likely as soon as it is activated) it will return TRUE and the verification is done. Once verified, the account doesn't need to revert back to unverified just because the EA is now saying it can't trade.
I had no problem providing my investor password so you could verify the trades I have uploaded. Excellent idea to counteract fack uploads.
I had no problem running an EA to further confirm the trades are legitamite ... EVEN THOUGH the source code for this EA is not apparently available and so I cannot verify what you are actually able to do in this EA. Trust goes both ways. I have no problem with this EA because I can simply enable 'ask manual confirmtion' to know it wont place any trades and I know enough about MQ4 to know there is no information it can send to you that could put my account at risk.
But forcing us to make a trade with a specific comment ... to far!
Did you consider simply using your existing EA to verify the ability to trade? There is a very basic function in MQ4 called 'IsTradeAllowed' that can verify the person who is running the EA has trading privileges for that account. Sure, it may return the odd FALSE if the trade context is busy etc, but at some stage (most likely as soon as it is activated) it will return TRUE and the verification is done. Once verified, the account doesn't need to revert back to unverified just because the EA is now saying it can't trade.
Tham gia từ Jul 31, 2009
1449bài viết
Nov 30, 2009 at 14:00
Allaneagle, we've indeed explored all possibilities before deciding on the best way to go.
The EA option is not good, since an EA can be easily decompiled, so a validation of such kind will be useless.
You're correct regarding the trust issue - so we'll be adding the full source of the EA to the help section, as we don't have anything to hide.
We apologize if this wasn't clear, but <b>this step is actually optional</b>, and is meant for managers to add credibility to their performance by verifying they have the trading access to the account and they didn't just used the investor password to publish the account as if it were theirs, so it's up to you to decide if to use it or not.
We see no major issue in opening a trade and closing it immediately with the smallest possible size, as it will cost you practically nothing, but will add a lot if looking for clients.
We really appreciate your concern as we're sure some feel the same way, so hopefully, this answer will clear your doubts.
Thank you.
The EA option is not good, since an EA can be easily decompiled, so a validation of such kind will be useless.
You're correct regarding the trust issue - so we'll be adding the full source of the EA to the help section, as we don't have anything to hide.
We apologize if this wasn't clear, but <b>this step is actually optional</b>, and is meant for managers to add credibility to their performance by verifying they have the trading access to the account and they didn't just used the investor password to publish the account as if it were theirs, so it's up to you to decide if to use it or not.
We see no major issue in opening a trade and closing it immediately with the smallest possible size, as it will cost you practically nothing, but will add a lot if looking for clients.
We really appreciate your concern as we're sure some feel the same way, so hopefully, this answer will clear your doubts.
Thank you.
Tham gia từ Aug 17, 2009
24bài viết
Nov 30, 2009 at 14:17
Fair point on the decompiled EA and I am glad to hear you will be posting the source code (although simply making the MQ4 downloadable instead of the EX4 would be the better option). I didn't think you had anything to hide at all and hope I did not imply that.
And fair point on the 'optional' part. I guess I just didn't really like the fact that my pages now have this very obvious and highly visable red mark against them when I know I have done nothing wrong and I myself have nothing to hide.
I am concerned about fake data and appreciate the efforts to try to counteract it. I also appreciate the very fast and candid response.
And fair point on the 'optional' part. I guess I just didn't really like the fact that my pages now have this very obvious and highly visable red mark against them when I know I have done nothing wrong and I myself have nothing to hide.
I am concerned about fake data and appreciate the efforts to try to counteract it. I also appreciate the very fast and candid response.
Tham gia từ Jul 31, 2009
1449bài viết
Nov 30, 2009 at 14:37
We understand your point of view - if you're using our platform for your own use, you don't need to worry about the red cross thingy 😉 , but if you decide to look for clients, we must provide the most current and correct data we have to your potential clients.
By the way, we've just released the full source code of our EA as promised 😄
https://www.myfxbook.com/help#help_33
By the way, we've just released the full source code of our EA as promised 😄
https://www.myfxbook.com/help#help_33
Tham gia từ Sep 03, 2009
16bài viết
Nov 30, 2009 at 21:25
at the end of the day, your gonna make a trade at some point! just add the comment when your ready to trade, staff are correct as with most things mt4 - transactions, EA's etc they can be modified, manipulated, forged, the platforms only letdown. its not like theres a time window to whe you must make that trade!
he who dares shall win
Tham gia từ Oct 06, 2009
32bài viết
Dec 01, 2009 at 11:29
set the comment next time you place a trade? unless your never going to trade again.
Staff,
Would a limit/stop order well away from the price (with the comment) which is cancelled be something you could use? Although I think its a waste of resources ;)
Staff,
Would a limit/stop order well away from the price (with the comment) which is cancelled be something you could use? Although I think its a waste of resources ;)
Tham gia từ Jul 31, 2009
1449bài viết
Dec 01, 2009 at 11:33
We've actually experimented it with orders, but the problem is that when you cancel an order, the comment is overwritten with the word 'canceled'.
Tham gia từ Nov 18, 2009
27bài viết
Dec 01, 2009 at 15:30
allanneagle posted:
But forcing us to make a trade with a specific comment ... to far!
Correct me if I am wrong, but the way I understand it is this. The comment with the key pasted is only needed once which verifies the accounts autheticity.
In other words I can (if I choose to) wait until my next trade (or closing of trade) and paste the key in the comment field, rather than open and close a tiny trade for that purpose.
And as far as the EA is concerned, if one has any doubt about what is in it, then simply don't install it and use the MT4 publisher instead.
Lance.
"Whatever you focus your attention on, your consciousness becomes." - Lex Lungold.
Tham gia từ Jul 31, 2009
1449bài viết
Dec 01, 2009 at 15:50
BlueMental posted:
allanneagle posted:
But forcing us to make a trade with a specific comment ... to far!
Correct me if I am wrong, but the way I understand it is this. The comment with the key pasted is only needed once which verifies the accounts autheticity.
In other words I can (if I choose to) wait until my next trade (or closing of trade) and paste the key in the comment field, rather than open and close a tiny trade for that purpose.
And as far as the EA is concerned, if one has any doubt about what is in it, then simply don't install it and use the MT4 publisher instead.
Lance.
Yes Lance, both points are correct.
forex_trader_4651
Tham gia từ Dec 18, 2009
1bài viết
Dec 21, 2009 at 08:49
I´ve also one question about the verification of trading privileges:
Does it matter, if the authorization key is only one part of my order comment, like: '23001_Long_1.54327_u4h453l5j3' (in this example, u4h453l5j3 should be the authorization key - only an example too).
So do you screen the order comment string for the authorization key or do you directly compare?
It would be very helpful, if my mentioned example would work too!
tom
Does it matter, if the authorization key is only one part of my order comment, like: '23001_Long_1.54327_u4h453l5j3' (in this example, u4h453l5j3 should be the authorization key - only an example too).
So do you screen the order comment string for the authorization key or do you directly compare?
It would be very helpful, if my mentioned example would work too!
tom
Tham gia từ Jul 31, 2009
1449bài viết
Dec 21, 2009 at 08:56
tomtom posted:
I´ve also one question about the verification of trading privileges:
Does it matter, if the authorization key is only one part of my order comment, like: '23001_Long_1.54327_u4h453l5j3' (in this example, u4h453l5j3 should be the authorization key - only an example too).
So do you screen the order comment string for the authorization key or do you directly compare?
It would be very helpful, if my mentioned example would work too!
tom
Yes, we search for a sub-string and not compare it as a whole.
Just make sure you don't reach the length limit of the comment or else the key will be cut off.
*Nghiêm cấm sử dụng cho mục đích thương mại và spam, nếu vi phạm có thể dẫn đến việc chấm dứt tài khoản.
Mẹo: Đăng ảnh/url youtube sẽ tự động được nhúng vào bài viết của bạn!
Mẹo: Dùng @ để tự động điền tên người dùng tham gia vào cuộc thảo luận này.
