Replies to post #676086 on NorthWest Biotherapeutics Inc (NWBO)

[biosectinvestor]

Not if it is algorithmically created, you don’t understand the nature of institutions, or the concept of intent. Intent to do the act, or facilitate customer trading using a tool that someone put into commerce without properly determining if it violated the law or not. Intent is “diffuse” in this context, and not what you think it is….
You don’t have to have what some people think, in order to get to the relevant “intent”… and the problem with a matured on bulletin boards or at investment managers is that they think they can hide behind tools, tools they may very well know are not kosher but that they can plausibly deny they knew were spoofing. But spoofing is a clear cut activity. All you need to prove is that there was actual spoofing, it doesn’t require the level of knowledge you think. It is just that the right cases have not yet been litigated. I suspect this is going to be the right case.

The reality is that people writing these things think that our laws clearly give them some sort of all clear sign to break the law, but we have a case law system where new technologies and ideas reveal themselves only gradually, and as the system becomes more aware of the nature of systems, they will apply the relevant rules. But the people who are doing these things, they think last year’s very poor case dictates how a court will perceive their activity. That is not true at all.

[biosectinvestor]

Let me put it more clearly for you. If I tell my programmer to create an algorithmic system that “gets the best price” for my customers, and he does the math and inadvertently realizes that trading activity that a judge would dub intentional spoofing, is the best way, but the programmer doesn’t know it’s illegal, and the buyer of the software “ claims he know” it was spoofing, but that is, in fact, what it did, the intent IS there, regardless of what everyone claims they knew, claims they did not know, wished they knew, etc. the intent is not what you think it is, and plausible deniability is not going to likely suffice.

[The Danish Dude]

Very difficult not to laugh when hearing the phraze "missing the point" by a guy who seems be able to duck and avoid all incoming facts regarding ATL-DC in UCLAs two combo trials being DCVax-L 🥳

Happy new year ex!

[learningcurve2020]

Correct. The intent is having no intention to buy. The intent is communication between several mm's telling each other not to chase the bid.

>>If you place a buy limit order with no intent to buy hoping that causes other buyers to raise the bid, that is a spoof.

Intent is core to the issue.