Also, you're asking us to disclose data from another trader's account, which we clearly cannot do. We would not only violate trader's privacy but also our Privacy Policy.
The trader already disclosed his own track record here.
Post #32 and also in
Post #30. The trader did this voluntarily. We are free to scrutinize this record. No violation of any privacy, unless you want to make the claim that he violated "himself".
Also, there were no attempts to contact us at that period of time regarding this. It's an assumption you're making and this does not fit in any way with what we posted earlier nor with the case itself. Another one is that someone was paid out profits, which is absolute nonsense.
@Muhammad siddique did you attempt to contact OctaFx
after their initial decision to deny your profits for alleged OctaFx arbitrage, but before you post your case on FPA? If so, what dates?
It would not change anything, even if we did post the calculation because, there's nothing to back it against.
Firstly, we wouldn't pay out profits for arbitrage trading because they are not for the clients' to enjoy, since it's in breach of our Customer Agreement. Secondly, we cannot discuss any matters regarding clients account with anyone but the client himself.
Nice deflection, again. But you have not shown how your are actually calculating arbitrage. Refusing to explain how OctaFx determine arbitrage with clear hypothetical or real trade history examples does not benefit your case or increase trader confidence in your business model. Now WHY you are doing this, I could make a lot of assumptions here, like:
1) You were warehousing the flow. This isn't inherently bad when done fairly (in the
client's best interest). But when done incorrectly, the client's trading gain is your loss. So rather than accept the loss, you just renege on the trade deal. Of course these decisions are 99.9% asymmetrical. The client cannot renege whenever they lose. It's a "real" loss that they must accept.
2) You don't want winning clients. Some brokers do not have it in their business models for clients to win too much. And they use all kinds of tools to trick a client into trading, but not being able to close a trade properly. Especially if you are primarily doing #1 with client flow.
But of course I want to avoid making assumptions. But I do want clear examples for the FPA community to scrutinize.
There's a very wise saying you should be aware of that an assumption is something that is generally accepted as being true. Assumptions are made and most assumptions are wrong. When we believe in lies, we cannot see the truth, so we make thousands of assumptions and we take them as truth.
With all due respect let's stick to the essence of what was being said here. Thank you.
Again, we do actually agree on something. Most assumptions are not the truth, they are fiction.
And we should stay on topic. One of the central topics throughout is OctaFx's determination of arbitrage to invalidate one or more trades. We want to keep traders who use these type of strategies away from OctaFx and not violate their user agreement. We also want to make sure that traders who make legitimate trades are not unfairly labeled as arbitrage only because they are profitable.
We can later open up a separate thread in the Mess Hall about spirituality if needed. Although I would like to resolve this case first.
