🚨 WeMasterTrade BOGO + SPIN TO WIN IS LIVE! 🎰🔥 Buy more. Get more. Win more. 🎁 BOGO OFFER Spend $175 / $300 / $600 after discount and unlock a FREE additional account. 🏷️ Use Code: BOGO33 💰 Get up to $400 OFF 🎰 SPIN TO WIN Spend $100+ after discount + complete the required tasks = 1 Spin Every additional $100 spent = +1 Spin 🏆 PRIZES INCLUDE: 📱 iPhone 18 Pro Max 251GB 💵 $200 Cash Prizes 💰 $50K Instant Accounts 💰 $10K & $15K Instant Accounts 🎟️ Discount Vouchers + more 📅 25–30 September 2026 BUY → SPIN → WIN 🔥 Don’t miss the BOGO while it’s live! Go & Grab Yours - my.wemastertrade.com/registe…

Hey @instagram @Meta, I urgently need someone to look into this. My Instagram account has been suspended AGAIN — for the third time, despite me not breaking Instagram’s rules or Community Standards. I have always followed Instagram’s policies and made sure my content complies with the platform’s guidelines. Yet, for the third time, my account has been suspended and I’m once again forced to go through the appeal process. This is unfair and extremely frustrating. I’ve spent years building my account and community, and repeatedly losing access to it despite following the rules is unacceptable. I’m also a Meta Verified subscriber, yet I’m still unable to get a clear explanation as to why this keeps happening. My account is currently under appeal, and I’m requesting an actual manual review and escalation by the Instagram team — not another automated decision. If these repeated suspensions are being triggered by false/mass reporting or an error in Instagram’s automated systems, please investigate my account history and the reports being submitted against it. Three suspensions of an account that has followed the rules should be enough reason for someone to properly investigate what is happening. @mosseri, I would genuinely appreciate your help in getting this in front of the right team. @instagram @Meta @MetaforBusiness @MetaNewsroom I’m not asking for special treatment. I’m asking for a fair review, an explanation for why this keeps happening, and a permanent resolution so I don’t have to keep going through this. Please help resolve this. My Instagram Username - SignedByAadit #InstagramSupport #MetaVerified #InstagramSuspended #InstagramAppeal #MetaSupport #InstagramCreators

Be honest traders 👀 What’s the ONE thing stopping you from becoming consistently profitable right now? A) Overtrading B) Bad risk management C) Emotions D) No proper strategy E) Prop firm rules 😭 Reply with yours 👇

It was a pleasure having you on our Discord Server Today @avikkfp 🫶♥️ We had a lot of fun & even did 5X$5,000 +$25,000 Account Spins for our Community. The community genuinely loved your presence!! We hope to see you soon again at our home @FxPropTraders ♥️ Thank you so much for taking out time!!

🚨INSTANT FUNDING PLUS IS BACK! No consistency rule. No evaluation. No profit target. @EvercrestFunds is bringing back Instant Funding Plus, with only 250 accounts available. Get yours and use code: FPT Trade instantly. No evaluation. No consistency rule. #Evercrest #PropTrading #FundedTrader #Forex #FPT

Your first goal in trading shouldn't be making $10k. It should be becoming the type of trader capable of making $10k consistently. Build the skill first. Money follows my brother...money follows

🚨 $8,230 PAYOUT REJECTED + $125K SCALED ACCOUNT TERMINATED — THE5ERS CASE DESERVES ANSWERS I’ve gone through the emails and the trader’s full timeline. Here are the facts. The trader says he had a $125,000 scaled funded account with @the5erstrading and had already received 4 previous payouts. His next pending payout: $8,230 After requesting it, his account was placed on hold and he was eventually called for a risk/verification interview. According to the trader, during that interview he: • Screen-shared his TradingView analysis • Logged into his MT5 live • Answered trading and leverage questions • Completed a liveness verification • Showed his other funded account when asked He says he was then told his account would be restored within 48 hours and the payout released. Instead, the next communication terminated the account. The stated reason? ❌ “Account Integrity & Exclusive Ownership.” The trader disputed that allegation and submitted evidence that he says showed he was the sole owner and trader of the accounts. Then the reasoning changed. A later The5ers email cited: ❌ “Evaluation vs. Funded Sizing and Style Shift” ❌ “Disproportionate Profit Concentration” ❌ “Aggressive Account Gambling” And this time they provided specific trades. They highlighted: • 2.2 lots Gold → +$8,712 • 2.2 lots Gold → +$8,241.20 • 35 lots NASDAQ • 20 lots NASDAQ • 2.5 lots Gold → +$7,592.50 The5ers’ position is that this trading represented excessive concentration, overexposure and behaviour inconsistent with the risk standards they expect from funded traders. That side of the story needs to be acknowledged. But the obvious question remains: Why was the account initially terminated for “account integrity and exclusive ownership,” only for the justification later to centre around lot sizing, profit concentration and trading style? And there’s another detail traders should know. The5ers’ current prohibited-trading page now explicitly addresses disproportionate sizing, concentrated exposure, major changes from evaluation to funded trading and speculative positions resembling gambling. That page shows a July 28, 2026 update date — after this dispute had already begun. Their broader Terms also give the company discretion to terminate activity it considers “uncommercial” or not a viable trading strategy. So I’m not going to falsely claim there was zero contractual basis. But when $8,230 is withheld and a $125K scaled account is terminated, traders deserve absolute clarity about: Was this an ownership violation? Or was it a risk/trading-style violation? And exactly which rule, as it existed when these trades were placed, was breached? The trader says he even offered two resolutions: ✅ Reinstate the account under whatever stricter risk limits The5ers required. OR ✅ Keep the account closed and simply pay the $8,230 already earned. Both were reportedly rejected. I’m not calling anyone guilty based on one side of a dispute. But the evidence here raises legitimate questions, and @the5erstrading should publicly explain the exact rule breached and why the stated reason changed. Because when payout decisions involve thousands of dollars, the rule should be clear before the trade, not something a trader has to understand only after the payout request. $8,230 denied. $125,000 scaled account closed. 4 previous payouts already completed. Traders can look at the evidence and decide for themselves. @propfirmknow @propfirmeye @PropFirmMedia @PropFirmMatch @Propfirm @PropFirmsCmpd @FxPropTraders @the5erstrading @The5ersFutures @Sameerthe5ers @the5ersIndia @SaulThe5ers @propfirmsfusion @PropFirmsGuru @propfirmwise @propfundsquad @JadeJMA1 @the5erslive @Alexander5ers_

The best traders aren't obsessed with being right. They're obsessed with improving.

🚨 UPDATE: $76K PAYOUT REPORTEDLY PROCESSED AFTER PUBLIC PRESSURE @Trillionarie369 A significant update in the ongoing case involving @the5erstrading. The trader was initially accused of group/coordinated trading, with allegations that his account had been accessed from more than 200 devices. The situation gained significant attention on social media after the trader publicly raised the issue. Yesterday, the trader confirmed that his $76,000 payout was successfully processed. That outcome is certainly positive for the trader. However, it also raises an important question about transparency and communication. When the payout was initially rejected, there was little public support or explanation surrounding the case. After the issue gained widespread attention, the payout was ultimately released. If the decision was reversed following a further investigation or additional evidence, that context should be communicated clearly. If the original decision was incorrect, it should be acknowledged. The prop trading industry needs clear processes, consistent decisions, and transparent communication especially when substantial trader payouts are involved. This isn't about attacking a firm. It's about making sure traders have confidence that disputed cases will be reviewed fairly, regardless of how much attention they receive. A payout being resolved is good. Transparency about why it was resolved is even better. 🤝

🎂 Happy Birthday to @Khldfx the man behind @fundingpips 🥳 Another year older, another year of trying to figure out how to survive traders From $300M+ in payouts to countless trader stories, you’ve definitely kept the prop firm industry interesting. Wishing you a year filled with more success, bigger milestones, fewer payout headaches, and traders who actually follow the rules. 😂 Have a great one! — FX Prop Traders 💜

$5,198.40 IN PAYOUTS .... A CASE THAT DESERVES A PROPER REVIEW I have previously worked with @Tradeify, traded with the firm, and personally received payouts from them. My experience has been positive. That said, supporting a firm does not mean ignoring situations that deserve further examination. Trader @ej_harish requested two payouts: 💰 $2,602.85 💰 $2,595.55 Total $5,198.40 According to the information and evidence shared publicly by the trader, the payouts were initially acknowledged, he completed the requested verification process, and he states that his KYC was approved. The payouts were subsequently denied, and his account access was removed over alleged “suspicious activity.” Tradeify representatives have since stated publicly that the concern involved the trader allegedly completing KYC through a virtual machine. The trader disputes this allegation and maintains that he completed the verification himself using his physical device, without a VM, VPS, VPN, proxy, or remote desktop. What stands out to me is that the trader is willing to cooperate further and has offered to: • Complete KYC again • Provide relevant device/IP information • Provide trading records • Provide account history • Cooperate with any additional verification required I completely understand why prop firms need strict KYC, security, and anti-fraud procedures. These safeguards are important for protecting both the firm and legitimate traders. However, when $5,198.40 in payouts and a trader’s account access are involved, I believe there is value in conducting a thorough manual review when the trader is willing to provide additional evidence. If Tradeify has conclusive evidence that a rule was violated, then the decision should be explained clearly and the appropriate action can stand. But if the issue resulted from a false flag, technical error, or inaccurate detection, then the matter should be reconsidered accordingly. The goal here is not to attack Tradeify. It is to ask for transparency and a fair review of the case. I have supported Tradeify when I believed they deserved it, and I will continue to do so. But fair criticism and accountability are equally important. Supporting a prop firm should never mean blindly supporting every decision. Traders deserve transparency. Firms deserve the opportunity to explain their decisions. And disputed cases deserve a fair review based on evidence. @Tradeify @BrettSimba @GandalfTrader I genuinely hope the Tradeify team can personally review this case and provide the trader with a clear explanation and fair resolution. Community members who may be able to help amplify this and get the case reviewed: @Abhiishek45 @MSTARROHIT @AmasPFT @vedictrades @Sai_Prasan @rraytradess @TraderAryan @gajapathyX @anandfx_og @shivanshufx @propfirmknow @propfirmeye @PropFirmMedia @PropFirmMatch @Propfirm @PropFirmsCmpd @FxPropTraders @propfirmsfusion @PropFirmsGuru @propfirmwise @propfundsquad I’ll continue following the situation and update the community once there is a confirmed resolution—whichever way it goes.

FundingPips Labs is LIVE. #E001 – Experimental account model 100k for just $99 ⚡ • 1-Step • Target: $5,000 • Max Loss: $3,000 • Min Days: None • Reward Split: 85% • Daily Rewards Labs is where FundingPips tests new account models with the community. This one looks spicy. 🥵

Traders, take note! @Tradeify Labor Day = adjusted trading hours. Make sure you know when the market closes and reopens so you’re not caught off guard with open positions or drawdown calculations. Trade smart, enjoy the long weekend, and come back fresh. 🇺🇸

You know you only have to like, comment and share our content to get a chance to win a free account . soo start noww!!

This is what listening to your traders looks like. @NYSMarkets has heard the community’s feedback and is switching its official economic news provider from Investing.com to Forex Factory, effective September 7. A positive step toward better alignment with traders and the tools they actually rely on. When a prop firm listens, traders notice. Respect to NYS for taking the feedback seriously.

Traders can read any chart 😂

A losing day doesn't erase months of progress. One bad trade doesn't define you. One bad week doesn't define you. Zoom out. ~~@wannabechamp

This is exactly what a trading community should be about. 🤝 One trader raised an issue. Others stood behind him. We made our voices heard and now @the5erstrading has finally responded. Let’s see how they handle it from here. Help someone today, because tomorrow you might need the community to stand with you. Traders supporting traders is how real change happens. Respect to everyone who spoke up. This is what community means. ❤️