undefined | Better HN

0 pointsmijamo5y ago0 comments

Your comment is funny because in many countries all people that talk in a national assembly need to disclose their stakes. So yes I can imagine it, because a lot of parliaments work exactly like that.

And I am not sure what "both ways" means but of course you have to disclose if you have taken a short position in the matter.

0 comments

3 comments · 1 top-level

pk_kinetic5y ago· 2 in thread

People who talk in a National Assembly have real influence on laws so conflict of interest is a real problem.

If the chair of the SEC comes out for or against crypto (or any financial product) of course we should know what investments he holds.

We’re arguing about a subject on a message board. It’s not going to have any influence whatsoever on the price or whether it fails or not.

I would hate to have to disclose the exact amount of Toyota stock I own anytime I argue with someone the merits of Toyota over Ford or Honda.

reducesuffering5y ago

You don’t have to. However, TFA explicitly asked you for this discussion. You’re free to join the thousands of other discussions where there’s no ask to disclose stake. There’s value in one that does.

pk_kinetic5y ago

I haven’t made a case either for or against crypto either way in this thread, except to state that I have some crypto.

There might be value in a discussion that asks for disclosure. I’m not sure this discussion is working as intended though, judging the amounts of disclosures in the comments. Just an observation.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse