4 ms·

I would argue that's the people's problem. How important is what they have to say anyway if they won't read the source and can't detect sarcasm? edit: also, ev

I would argue that's the people's problem. How important is what they have to say anyway if they won't read the source and can't detect sarcasm? edit: also, even if it's not a direct quote.. c'mon, it is what he's saying. The SEC made a rule that applies _specifically for crypto companies_, saying they have to disclose that crypto assets under their custody could potentially be taken in a bankruptcy.. and this guy goes on to say what he was just forced to disclose is not true. It doesn't get more obvious.

malfist 4y ago
It's not a people problem if you're making up quotes and people don't realize it. Use quoting for quotes. Everything else is in your own words, not someone elses, even if you are paraphrasing.
- DaveSchmindel 4y ago
  Thank you for summing it up this way. It certainly sounds like the original author wants to be taken seriously. In that case they should probably respect the fact that there is literally a word for what they've done. Misquote and its synonyms do not have good connotations, and in their worst form are simply libel...
  - tekknik 4y ago
    If only we took this much care in the news. How many times has both sides misquoted someone? Yet people only seem to care when it’s misquoting the Coinbase CEO.
oefrha 4y ago
“It is what he’s saying” is subjective. A quote is not (or shouldn’t be, despite far too many violations in the real world). Just say “Summary: blah blah” if you want to post your subjective summary.
- dj_mc_merlin 4y ago
  I do not believe a reasonable human would consider this statement: > Please ignore our SEC disclosure and half-billion dollar quarterly loss, and instead trust my unregulated statements posted on Twitter. As actually possibly coming from the mouth of the CEO of a company (that is not Elon).
  - oefrha 4y ago
    As I said, > People can’t detect subtle or not-so-subtle cues. Or they just skim part of the comment and jump to reply immediately. Same effect.
    - dhzhzjsbevs 4y ago
  - 300bps 4y ago
    I never would have thought a CEO would make a statement like this: >We have no risk of bankruptcy Reality is that every company has greater than "no risk" of bankruptcy. That's why regulators force them to spell out their risks in filings.
    - cinntaile 4y ago
      You already write why that is mathematically impossible, so the logical conclusion would be that it is not meant to be interpreted like that no? Language is not maths, no risk doesn't mean the risk is zero. It means the risk is unlikely.
      - 300bps 4y ago
        These are complicated topics. The people buying crypto at Coinbase are not sophisticated investors. It is entirely reasonable to believe that a large proportion of Coinbase users would read, "We have no risk of bankruptcy" and choose to leave their money at Coinbase believing that the CEO must have used some financial mechanism to 100% prevent bankruptcy. Words have meaning, and when you say, "no risk of bankruptcy" there are a lot of people that will be duped into believing that literally.

malfist 4y ago

It's not a people problem if you're making up quotes and people don't realize it. Use quoting for quotes. Everything else is in your own words, not someone elses, even if you are paraphrasing.

DaveSchmindel 4y ago
Thank you for summing it up this way. It certainly sounds like the original author wants to be taken seriously. In that case they should probably respect the fact that there is literally a word for what they've done. Misquote and its synonyms do not have good connotations, and in their worst form are simply libel...
- tekknik 4y ago
  If only we took this much care in the news. How many times has both sides misquoted someone? Yet people only seem to care when it’s misquoting the Coinbase CEO.

oefrha 4y ago

“It is what he’s saying” is subjective. A quote is not (or shouldn’t be, despite far too many violations in the real world). Just say “Summary: blah blah” if you want to post your subjective summary.

dj_mc_merlin 4y ago
I do not believe a reasonable human would consider this statement: > Please ignore our SEC disclosure and half-billion dollar quarterly loss, and instead trust my unregulated statements posted on Twitter. As actually possibly coming from the mouth of the CEO of a company (that is not Elon).
- oefrha 4y ago
  As I said, > People can’t detect subtle or not-so-subtle cues. Or they just skim part of the comment and jump to reply immediately. Same effect.
  - dhzhzjsbevs 4y ago
- 300bps 4y ago
  I never would have thought a CEO would make a statement like this: >We have no risk of bankruptcy Reality is that every company has greater than "no risk" of bankruptcy. That's why regulators force them to spell out their risks in filings.
  - cinntaile 4y ago
    You already write why that is mathematically impossible, so the logical conclusion would be that it is not meant to be interpreted like that no? Language is not maths, no risk doesn't mean the risk is zero. It means the risk is unlikely.
    - 300bps 4y ago
      These are complicated topics. The people buying crypto at Coinbase are not sophisticated investors. It is entirely reasonable to believe that a large proportion of Coinbase users would read, "We have no risk of bankruptcy" and choose to leave their money at Coinbase believing that the CEO must have used some financial mechanism to 100% prevent bankruptcy. Words have meaning, and when you say, "no risk of bankruptcy" there are a lot of people that will be duped into believing that literally.