You can use any country you like in a thread, but if you want to have a review approved, you have to tell the truth about your location. Why? Because when I took over the reviews I spotted that there were well over 100 reviews from Latvia claiming to be from everywhere but Latvia. Seems someone there was tearing down all well rated brokers except one. It was an effort by 1 person to single-handedly decide which broker would have the best rating. As I rechecked all existing reviews, I noticed that lies about country seems to correlate to others who seemed to want to manipulate the ratings, so I set the policy to require that country match IP. Before you ask, I also am aware of proxies and have ways to catch nearly all of them. If you've got an idea better than "Delete any review I disagree with" for improving the moderation of reviews, I'm open to feasible suggestions.
I sincerely hope you aren't one of those very special conspiracy theorists who think that a simple rule like "don't lie about your location in a review" should only apply to other people, especially other people who leave reviews which disagree with yours. The funny part is that a small group of angry clients of Honest Forex signals decided they would try to leave multiple reviews. If each of them had settled for a single review, each would have one approved and the rating woild be lower. They decided that the rules should apply to others and not to themselves. All of their reviews got deleted because they violated the rules. The same thing would have happened if their reviews had all been 5 stars or if thjose reviews had been left for any other company.
The FPA has firm rules that all review moderators follow. No one here picks and chooses which reviews get approved based on personal opinions. I could put every review for any company back in the mod queue and I'd expect my people would independently make over 95% of the decisions about which ones get approved and which don't the same as they are now.
Now you want me to block specific reviews because you dispute what they say. Imagine if someone who likes Honest Forex Signals asked me to block all of the negative reviews because they disagree with those. In the end, I'd have to declare every review for the company to be fake, since there would not be one review which all reviewers could agree on.
The FPA has a quick and easy way to check on reviews which didn't get approved. Click Contact Us and you'll be 2 mouseclicks away from a post which explains most cases where a review isn't approve, like lying about location. It also has a contact form to ask if if a reviewer still doesn't understand why a review isn't approved.
Too bad the FPA doesn't have the same staff and budget and staff size as Consumer Reports. If we did, I'd have already have most signals and EA services tested. Since the FPA is free and doesn't accept any of the bribe offers that come in, it's going to be a long time before I'm in a position to tell the owner that I need money and staff to test dozens of signals services to see who's lying about their performance. I'm just happy that many companies do volunteer for Performance Testing.
I wonder how you would deal with a job where every decision you make following fair guidelines applied equally to all companies could result in having to professionally respond to whining, conspiracy theories, wild accusations lies, and threats all the way up to legal threats and threats against your family by a broker with mental issues. Oh, and you have to be reasonably pleasant to people while doing this. I wonder how long you would last.
The FPA has simple and straightforward procedures for declaring a company to be a scam. If you want this to happen, you have 2 choices...
One is to stop wasting your time and my time and focus on following simple rules about how to get what you want. Stop ying about your location in your net review. Start your own thread about the company here in Scam Alerts. Post your evidence. Invite the company to join the discussion. If your evidence is good enough, open a Traders Court case. Cases ending with a guilty vote put warnings on pages. 3 or 4 cases is all it takes for a scam finding. Generally, 3 is all that is needed. I know of dozens of companies which have committed outright theft, but no one wants to follow through on the steps to give them a scam finding.
Two is to sit here complaining how evil and scammy I am for not deleting all the reviews you disagree with. You probably also think I should have kicked down the door of Honest Forex Signals. Then I supposed I should turn loose a team of commando forensic accountants to check their records and to force them to accept the Performance Testing invitations which I have sent to them many times for years now.