3 ms·

You realise that all of this stuff has specific rules. There are specific rules about posting research, there are specific rules about media (newspapers and TV)

You realise that all of this stuff has specific rules. There are specific rules about posting research, there are specific rules about media (newspapers and TV), there are specific rules about algorithms (I will answer your questions: no, no, no, no...the last question is...odd, if you know about sure-win algos then you must be very rich). And all of this stuff has happened before, it happened in 2000, lots of people went on bulletin boards, and some ended up going to jail for market manipulation. The difference between doing it publicly and privately is huge, that is a necessary component of market manipulation (generally speaking, market manipulation isn't very effective if you don't have anyone to baghold for you).

ericmay 6y ago
I'm more of a "spirit of the thing" than "this is what the text says" kind of guy. I'd argue that those things aren't fundamentally different than anything going on via WSB (assuming no bot accounts saying buy buy buy or something similar). I think the difference is that for these other items there's nobody around to measure the impact.
- hogFeast 6y ago
  No. If you do any of those things wrong then you will get charged. There aren't bot accounts. There are people telling other people to buy who are probably selling (there is a reason why DFV isn't posting anything but account updates). No conpsiracy theory around bots, the people manipulating the market are there, they are posting on a public forum. It doesn't get more cut and dry.
  - ericmay 6y ago
    I just don't see a difference in manipulating the markets through official channels versus unofficial channels. If CNBC wants to have me or reddit user r/deepfuckingvalue (Keith Gill) on their platform instead of WSB sure I'll give them some stock picks too.
jaywalk 6y ago
I'm certainly no expert in the rules at play here, but I can't fathom how posting on a public forum and saying "let's all go buy $GME and screw these hedge fund guys!" would not be absolutely protected by the First Amendment. There's no fraud or anything like that, and you're not posting anything false or misleading about the company. If a bunch of people feel like it's a good idea and want to join in, then it is what it is.
- hogFeast 6y ago
  Because there is the first amendment...and there is securities fraud. You are saying: anything that anyone says at any time has no legal consequence because of the first amendment...no. Misleading stuff is being posted on wsb. And some people are likely not being honest about what they are doing (i.e. telling people to buy when they are selling). This is how pump and dumps work. If you buy a stock worth $5 for $300...your only option is to sell to someone who knows nothing. That is what it is happening now. The stuff about hedge funds only came later, it is funny that people are citing this now (as ever, financial markets and ex-post rationalisations...human reasoning is amazing). All this stuff about revolutions against bankers, and the wealthy, and politicans leaping onto it...lol. The funniest thing about this is that people who have the least knowledge believe they need protection the least...and when this blows up, they will still say it is rigged. Oh well. Plus ca change.

ericmay 6y ago

I'm more of a "spirit of the thing" than "this is what the text says" kind of guy. I'd argue that those things aren't fundamentally different than anything going on via WSB (assuming no bot accounts saying buy buy buy or something similar). I think the difference is that for these other items there's nobody around to measure the impact.

hogFeast 6y ago
No. If you do any of those things wrong then you will get charged. There aren't bot accounts. There are people telling other people to buy who are probably selling (there is a reason why DFV isn't posting anything but account updates). No conpsiracy theory around bots, the people manipulating the market are there, they are posting on a public forum. It doesn't get more cut and dry.
- ericmay 6y ago
  I just don't see a difference in manipulating the markets through official channels versus unofficial channels. If CNBC wants to have me or reddit user r/deepfuckingvalue (Keith Gill) on their platform instead of WSB sure I'll give them some stock picks too.

jaywalk 6y ago

I'm certainly no expert in the rules at play here, but I can't fathom how posting on a public forum and saying "let's all go buy $GME and screw these hedge fund guys!" would not be absolutely protected by the First Amendment. There's no fraud or anything like that, and you're not posting anything false or misleading about the company. If a bunch of people feel like it's a good idea and want to join in, then it is what it is.

hogFeast 6y ago
Because there is the first amendment...and there is securities fraud. You are saying: anything that anyone says at any time has no legal consequence because of the first amendment...no. Misleading stuff is being posted on wsb. And some people are likely not being honest about what they are doing (i.e. telling people to buy when they are selling). This is how pump and dumps work. If you buy a stock worth $5 for $300...your only option is to sell to someone who knows nothing. That is what it is happening now. The stuff about hedge funds only came later, it is funny that people are citing this now (as ever, financial markets and ex-post rationalisations...human reasoning is amazing). All this stuff about revolutions against bankers, and the wealthy, and politicans leaping onto it...lol. The funniest thing about this is that people who have the least knowledge believe they need protection the least...and when this blows up, they will still say it is rigged. Oh well. Plus ca change.