Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Discord bans r/WallStreetBets server, subreddit went private for a while

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

821–830 of 1001 posts

Re: Discord bans r/WallStreetBets server, subreddit went private for a while

#821

Post by marvin »

IgorPartola wrote: post #792
marvin wrote: post #699

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Discord ban was clearly because the community itself is controversial from a legal point of view. That's why the ban happened today. But I think this is an unwise move. Each community that is censored over something legal but controversial, pushes the creative citizens of the Internet towards building more open platforms. Hope we end up there soon, this constant censorship of communities I might want to have a lo…

How exactly is WSB controversial from a legal point of view?

Maybe I was imprecise to use the term legal.

By definition, WSB is controversial because a lot of powerful people criticise them and would prefer them not to exist. Legally, I can see that they're moving in an uncharted gray area that might eventually require lawyers and a judge to determine whether they did something illegal, or that eventually attracts lawmakers to adapt existing regulation.

I'm firmly on the side of WSB here though, and none of the above should be considered a moral rationale for its pre-emptive censorship. Controversial certainly doesn't mean wrong, of which one might have the impression after the last months of social media purges.

I'm not at all surprised that WSB becomes the focus of such a power struggle, and very much hope it becomes another catalyst towards de-centralized, censorship-proof online communities.

Re: Discord bans r/WallStreetBets server, subreddit went private for a while

#822

Post by deadbunny »

user-the-name wrote: post #806
IgorPartola wrote: post #792

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How exactly is WSB controversial from a legal point of view?

Stock market manipulation.

Except everything they are doing is perfectly legal. They noticed some people had overextended their short position, they took action (action that "legitimate" traders were also taking) and stand to make some money.

I don't see how that is market manipulation any more than short sellers shorting over 100% of a stock.

Maybe there is an argument for regulation to prevent this but the financial sector has been staunchly against any such regulation for decades.

Re: Discord bans r/WallStreetBets server, subreddit went private for a while

#823

Post by coding_lobster »

simplecto wrote: post #814
krageon wrote: post #782

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not what they said at all.

Ahem... https://thenextweb.com/shareables/2010/02/27/newsweek-1995-b... https://blogs.mprnews.org/newscut/2012/02/the_internet_futur...

Pretty sure when krageon said "that's not what they said" they were referring to poster of the original comment that was being replied to - not the know it alls from 90s.

Re: Discord bans r/WallStreetBets server, subreddit went private for a while

#824

Post by mqrs »

betwixthewires wrote: post #731
Traster wrote: post #714

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People need to stop being so lazy and throwing around the word censorship. If a bunch or teenagers come into my coffee shop and start loudly calling each autists and retards I'm going to kick them out. I'm not censoring them by kicking them out.

This is a tired old argument and it isn't convincing or effective. There's a big difference between some kids screaming in your coffee shop and a community on a website supposedly dedicated to free discussion. A more apt comparison would be a group in a corner having a conversation at a rock concert. Suddenly this argument appears less apt. And while some are screaming for these sites to get shut down over it, most o…

> A more apt comparison would be a group in a corner having a conversation at a rock concert. Suddenly this argument appears less apt.

This is a tired old argument and it isn't convincing or effective. There's a big difference between having a conversation in a corner at a rock concert, and having a conversation in an online service hosted by someone else outside of that conversation, in a territory owned by a state where the host has to comply with laws which place the accountability of user-generated content on the host. A more apt comparison would be... I don't know, I actually don't have any idea. How about simply not being deliberately offensive or hateful or using whatever rhetoric that could ultimately translate into real-world violence?

Re: Discord bans r/WallStreetBets server, subreddit went private for a while

#825

Post by mrtksn »

davedx wrote: post #816
mrtksn wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

See, the problem is that people are doing all this because they believe that it doesn’t matter. These are not idealists or indoctrinated revolutionaries. No one is going to do anything if it’s not going to bring lulz or cash quickly because nothing matters anyway. All the anti establishment movement is nihilistic in its core. These are not Eastern European kids who dream to finish school and go to Western Europe and…

"See, the problem is that people are doing all this because they believe that it doesn’t matter. These are not idealists or indoctrinated revolutionaries. No one is going to do anything if it’s not going to bring lulz or cash quickly because nothing matters anyway. All the anti establishment movement is nihilistic in its core." I'm so happy we have mrtksn to explain the motives of about 5 million different people. Th…

Hey that's my opinion, sue me. You are free to have a different one.

Re: Discord bans r/WallStreetBets server, subreddit went private for a while

#826

Post by jariel »

jug wrote: post #777

It does feel like a watershed moment regarding hedge funds. This is the first time netizens capitalize on hedge fund short favorites and it has been surprisingly easy to cause an absolute catastrophy in the order of billion losses for them. I heard Melvin Capital may even have gone bankrupt? And how to do it? You get people to invest in a stock that is expected by the industry to go belly up. Seriously. It's that eas…

I'm sorry but this is a possibly irresponsible take for at least a few reasons.

The populism on this issue is completely out of touch with reality.

1) As the stock pops due to irrational upwards pressure - the hedges funds might lose a bit, but in reality a lot of 'regular people' will be left holding the bag.

When the stock inevitably crashes, those 'regular people' will lose a lot and it will probably be a more meaningful loss to them.

2) There is no easy way to make money doing this - you're literally promoting a collective ponzi scheme (!) whereby the only money made is by people putting more money in.

3) Bankers have a role to play in markets and that's by properly valuing them. Obviously there are tons of shenanigans, but otherwise, it's an essential role. 'Pumping and dumping stocks' is not value creating it's actually quite destructive. While Game Stop may appreciate being helped in some way, they are not going to appreciate their stock going insanely volatile. Why do you think they would actually want this?

The populism on this issue is really out of hand.

"So it's simple to discover and execute, and there is a financial incentive, " - please - no, this is completely irresponsible.

Re: Discord bans r/WallStreetBets server, subreddit went private for a while

#827

Post by grumple »

Tenoke wrote: post #820
jug wrote: post #777

It does feel like a watershed moment regarding hedge funds. This is the first time netizens capitalize on hedge fund short favorites and it has been surprisingly easy to cause an absolute catastrophy in the order of billion losses for them. I heard Melvin Capital may even have gone bankrupt? And how to do it? You get people to invest in a stock that is expected by the industry to go belly up. Seriously. It's that eas…

It's not quite that easy. You have to find a stock that's overshorted (>100% of shares here) irresponsibly (if they used e.g puts they'd be fine), buy a lot and hold it long enough. Also quite likely WSB money wasnt enough and it's only because other hedge funds jumped in that we got here. What Melvin did was risky and avoidable.

The stock doesn’t actually need to be shorted that much. We’re seeing the same thing happen with Koss, BB, and AMC right now. The infamous VW short squeeze was also caused by significantly less short interest: https://www.autoweek.com/news/industry-news/a35340727/heres-...

Re: Discord bans r/WallStreetBets server, subreddit went private for a while

#828

Post by whywhywhywhy »

rvz wrote: post #187

Here come the deplatforming (again). This time /r/wsb is the 'enemy'. Media reports it and causes the paper hands to panic; This is what the large short sellers want. Are they sure that 'deplatforming works' this time? (The have already assembled on /r/wallstreetbetsnew) For the tech platforms, the mainstream media, social media, etc they might as well ban every single person off of the internet at this point. As for…

> (The have already assembled on /r/wallstreetbetsnew)

Creating a new sub on the same topic as a previously banned sub is against the rules on Reddit. So if their sub is banned for hate speech it doesn't matter how you rephrase it they just ban any similar new subs.

Re: Discord bans r/WallStreetBets server, subreddit went private for a while

#829

Post by wcoenen »

jug wrote: post #777

It does feel like a watershed moment regarding hedge funds. This is the first time netizens capitalize on hedge fund short favorites and it has been surprisingly easy to cause an absolute catastrophy in the order of billion losses for them. I heard Melvin Capital may even have gone bankrupt? And how to do it? You get people to invest in a stock that is expected by the industry to go belly up. Seriously. It's that eas…

Short squeeze are nothing new, so it doesn't feel like a "watershed moment" to me. Big investors also do it to each other, e.g. the Herbalife short squeeze.

https://money.cnn.com/2018/03/01/investing/herbalife-bill-ac...

Re: Discord bans r/WallStreetBets server, subreddit went private for a while

#830

Post by lordnacho »

jug wrote: post #777

It does feel like a watershed moment regarding hedge funds. This is the first time netizens capitalize on hedge fund short favorites and it has been surprisingly easy to cause an absolute catastrophy in the order of billion losses for them. I heard Melvin Capital may even have gone bankrupt? And how to do it? You get people to invest in a stock that is expected by the industry to go belly up. Seriously. It's that eas…

As a former fund manager, I think it mainly illuminates bad risk management practices at one specific fund. Why would you ever paint yourself in a corner where you lose 30% on a single name? It just makes me think all their other bets are also huge and simply lucky they haven't collapsed.

Funds are also diverse, though. There will be a load of funds who have taken the other side to Melvin, based either on various fundamental insights, or technical, whatever.

Post reply on HN