6 ms·

@dang, you should think about adding a disclaimer to every crypto-related submission, just regex the title with the typical key words to catch them, with someth

by desmap 6y ago

@dang, you should think about adding a disclaimer to every crypto-related submission, just regex the title with the typical key words to catch them, with something like: Be aware that crypto-related submissions like this one might be intended to trigger or influence a wanted market behavior by OP.

hbosch 6y ago
A little superfluous. Couldn't we just assume that any blog post about any topic "might be intended to trigger or influence a wanted market behavior"? A news article critical of Amazon warehouse management could also be seen the exact same way.
- desmap 6y ago
  That's absolutely true and every post can have a hidden agenda. However and in particular in this field hidden agendas are more common or let's call it pump and dump schemes. Cause and effect are so much closer together than in other fields, e.g. when I post how great Ruby is I cannot expect that the next day 10K new devs learn again Ruby haha and even if, I won't make any money over night. Maybe my Ruby course business (just an example, I don't have one haha) would get few more subscriptions but yeah.
diegoperini 6y ago
The OP can be a victim of the original article's author as well. I agree with your intention though.
throwaway3699 6y ago
Any article posted here could cause market movements. We discuss public companies all the time.
- desmap 6y ago
  Apples to oranges. Manipulating stock prices of public companies is much harder/more complex than of crypto currencies.
  - throwaway3699 6y ago
    Right but I do think the principle is the same. We're commenting on an asset. If the market moves due to that conversation then so be it. The GameStop fiasco proves that it's really not hard to manipulate public trading as one might initially think.
loceng 6y ago
Also @dang, should require every user to add a tag/label that will show us if they are a Bitcoin speculator/owner, and would be great if then upvotes/downvotes had a stat that was viewable to see what % of upvotes/downvotes posts or comments have are by those who are financially incentivized for Bitcoin to succeed. Edit to add: what are the odds this comment would be downvoted in a Bitcoin thread? Would be great to see the bias of upvote/downvoters and commenters in Bitcoin threads, then can have 2 thread columns: top comments for those who own Bitcoin, and top comments for those who don't own Bitcoin; obviously it'd an honour system and could be gamed.
- judge2020 6y ago
  Let's make people link their brokerage account while we're at it so that someone can't post Waymo news if they own GOOG stock.
  - loceng 6y ago
    That's a bad faith exaggeration argument you just made: we don't need to know everything someone has financial interest in, just if it's related to the topic. It's why VCs, for example, if writing a blog post about a company - they will write a disclaimer that they own shares in the company. We have laws to require people to disclose if something is sponsorship as well - because it changes the value of what's being said.
    - judge2020 6y ago
      > we don't need to know everything someone has financial interest in You wouldn't. You would just know that OP owns GOOG if the article is about GOOG. Only HN/the brokerage would have their entire portfolio. > It's why VCs, for example, if writing a blog post about a company - they will write a disclaimer that they own shares in the company As far as I can tell this isn't a legal requirement - shareholders have no obligation to disclose their position, even major stakeholders don't have to do so every time they post about the company - it's mainly to protect the writer's reputation and because they really don't want to mislead the reader. The point is that HN shouldn't be the one keeping the comments and submissions free of articles posted "for the intent of manipulating the market" regardless if we're talking about crypto securities or public securities.
dang 6y ago
I don't think HN readers need us to tell them that.

by desmap 6y ago

hbosch 6y ago

A little superfluous. Couldn't we just assume that any blog post about any topic "might be intended to trigger or influence a wanted market behavior"? A news article critical of Amazon warehouse management could also be seen the exact same way.

desmap 6y ago
That's absolutely true and every post can have a hidden agenda. However and in particular in this field hidden agendas are more common or let's call it pump and dump schemes. Cause and effect are so much closer together than in other fields, e.g. when I post how great Ruby is I cannot expect that the next day 10K new devs learn again Ruby haha and even if, I won't make any money over night. Maybe my Ruby course business (just an example, I don't have one haha) would get few more subscriptions but yeah.

diegoperini 6y ago

The OP can be a victim of the original article's author as well. I agree with your intention though.

throwaway3699 6y ago

Any article posted here could cause market movements. We discuss public companies all the time.

desmap 6y ago
Apples to oranges. Manipulating stock prices of public companies is much harder/more complex than of crypto currencies.
- throwaway3699 6y ago
  Right but I do think the principle is the same. We're commenting on an asset. If the market moves due to that conversation then so be it. The GameStop fiasco proves that it's really not hard to manipulate public trading as one might initially think.

loceng 6y ago

Also @dang, should require every user to add a tag/label that will show us if they are a Bitcoin speculator/owner, and would be great if then upvotes/downvotes had a stat that was viewable to see what % of upvotes/downvotes posts or comments have are by those who are financially incentivized for Bitcoin to succeed. Edit to add: what are the odds this comment would be downvoted in a Bitcoin thread? Would be great to see the bias of upvote/downvoters and commenters in Bitcoin threads, then can have 2 thread columns: top comments for those who own Bitcoin, and top comments for those who don't own Bitcoin; obviously it'd an honour system and could be gamed.

judge2020 6y ago
Let's make people link their brokerage account while we're at it so that someone can't post Waymo news if they own GOOG stock.
- loceng 6y ago
  That's a bad faith exaggeration argument you just made: we don't need to know everything someone has financial interest in, just if it's related to the topic. It's why VCs, for example, if writing a blog post about a company - they will write a disclaimer that they own shares in the company. We have laws to require people to disclose if something is sponsorship as well - because it changes the value of what's being said.
  - judge2020 6y ago
    > we don't need to know everything someone has financial interest in You wouldn't. You would just know that OP owns GOOG if the article is about GOOG. Only HN/the brokerage would have their entire portfolio. > It's why VCs, for example, if writing a blog post about a company - they will write a disclaimer that they own shares in the company As far as I can tell this isn't a legal requirement - shareholders have no obligation to disclose their position, even major stakeholders don't have to do so every time they post about the company - it's mainly to protect the writer's reputation and because they really don't want to mislead the reader. The point is that HN shouldn't be the one keeping the comments and submissions free of articles posted "for the intent of manipulating the market" regardless if we're talking about crypto securities or public securities.

dang 6y ago

I don't think HN readers need us to tell them that.