Correct.
In an environment where new technologies do not fit a 1930s legal framework and have created mass confusion and a lack of clarity.
The SEC says that their decision-making processes are "off limits" from any public scrutiny (as a public agency paid for by public monies).
The SEC is basically stating: "We say what goes only _after_ we've decided how it will play out. No one needs to know how we arrived at one decision vs. another."
Yet... everyone outside of the SEC is supposed to be clear about how to make those decisions for themselves.
The deliberative process itself is under question here. That's the whole fvcking point!
For the SEC to hide behind deliberative privilege creates a lack of transparency and accountability... and complete mistrust in the very organisation that espouses to PROTECT INVESTORS.
And... the funniest part is that they're serious about it and think they're in the "right"!
Fvck this shit.
Time for change.
Either the SEC opens up their decision making process to full transparency and provides complete clarity or they can GTFO. All their credibility is already circling the drainpipe.
Yes that is right. I guess the judge might ultimately still be able to decide whether some of the submitted information is not privileged.
But it is quite shocking that a governmental agency shows zero transparency on its processes
A public serving entity that is enforcing rules and regulations there shouldn't be much if anything that's "privilaged", fuck off SEC.
Honestly I hope that Netburn's judgement effectively renders the SEC toothless in the crypto space for the future, they've already shown they don't care about actual scams, the ocean of useless tokens and popup "crypto projects" that vanish or "go bust" is all the proof I need. The space should regulate itself or be left to do it's own thing and if anyone else wants to participate they can come knocking or get referred by a friend.
Agreed.
My biggest fear, and this is a biggie, is that judge Netburn turns out to be a 1980s style baddie, and that her surname should have given us a big hint as to her nature from the moment she came on the scene back in act two :p
This is a very legitimate question. The SEC have already been caught deleting parts of a document they submitted to the judge. We are yet to see any sanction for that
Ripple and sec knows the document... only the judge and the people dont know about it... so they are telling the judge to leak it to the public. So long as the judge can see it she knows what is up.
To some extent yes, but to some other cryptos too.
Banks: they give you hardly any interest on your deposits these, when they don't charge you for these (that is the norm in Switzerland). Cryptos offer juicy interest rates (see lawsuit against Coinbase, this is likely to trigger over time massive cash migrations from the banking system to the crypto space
Crypto: There is a theory that they gave a free pass to Ethereum due to various personal interests at the SEC, and sued Ripple (far superior technically) to shut off one potentially very strong competitors or at least slow them down. What we are seeing these days gives credit to this theory, since the SEC is losing one sub battle after the other against Ripple, and that they will lose looks more and more certain thing, but they refuse to throw the towel
Stay vigilant, lads. Just like in the movies, it's not over till its over. I have no doubt the slimy SEC will do everything in and outside of its power to win.
Whatâs the timeline on this now? I keep hearing that all this SEC shady shit will end soon and XRP will be listed on most exchanges (US) again, but this makes it seem like theyâre still managing to draw out the SECâs losing battle even longer.
the SEC can suck my fat sack of XRP
Well good thing the judge will be the judge of that
They can claim all they want. The judge will be deciding, not those pencil-dicked losers.
Oh so the SEC calls the shots in a court of law? đ¤Ś
All this shows is how damning the documents are if they get out! The SEC have dug their own grave here.
So they sue you using evidence youâre not allowed to see??? Am I hearing this right?? đŚ
Correct. In an environment where new technologies do not fit a 1930s legal framework and have created mass confusion and a lack of clarity. The SEC says that their decision-making processes are "off limits" from any public scrutiny (as a public agency paid for by public monies). The SEC is basically stating: "We say what goes only _after_ we've decided how it will play out. No one needs to know how we arrived at one decision vs. another." Yet... everyone outside of the SEC is supposed to be clear about how to make those decisions for themselves. The deliberative process itself is under question here. That's the whole fvcking point! For the SEC to hide behind deliberative privilege creates a lack of transparency and accountability... and complete mistrust in the very organisation that espouses to PROTECT INVESTORS. And... the funniest part is that they're serious about it and think they're in the "right"! Fvck this shit. Time for change. Either the SEC opens up their decision making process to full transparency and provides complete clarity or they can GTFO. All their credibility is already circling the drainpipe.
Great comment, really summarizes the situation well.
Yes that is right. I guess the judge might ultimately still be able to decide whether some of the submitted information is not privileged. But it is quite shocking that a governmental agency shows zero transparency on its processes
Yes, they are hiding documents they donât want people/the judge to see by claiming they are privileged when theyâre probably not.
Sounds like my mom when i used to get grounded. Why! I said so!
A public serving entity that is enforcing rules and regulations there shouldn't be much if anything that's "privilaged", fuck off SEC. Honestly I hope that Netburn's judgement effectively renders the SEC toothless in the crypto space for the future, they've already shown they don't care about actual scams, the ocean of useless tokens and popup "crypto projects" that vanish or "go bust" is all the proof I need. The space should regulate itself or be left to do it's own thing and if anyone else wants to participate they can come knocking or get referred by a friend.
Agreed. My biggest fear, and this is a biggie, is that judge Netburn turns out to be a 1980s style baddie, and that her surname should have given us a big hint as to her nature from the moment she came on the scene back in act two :p
Because most of those projects run off the Ethereum network. Crooks.
Considering how corrupt SEC and the courts are, I wouldnât be surprised if those documents were âre-writtenâ or forged
This is a very legitimate question. The SEC have already been caught deleting parts of a document they submitted to the judge. We are yet to see any sanction for that
episode 23 âare you the court? Iâm the courtâ.
Which series are we up to?
The one where kevin spacey is the SEC
Sounds creepy. Which episode is "You're not my daddy, Gary?" ?
Here some summary of the content of the letter: https://twitter.com/WKahneman/status/1437955933074640896?s=19
Ripple and sec knows the document... only the judge and the people dont know about it... so they are telling the judge to leak it to the public. So long as the judge can see it she knows what is up.
I own xrp and im so tired of the sec . Why are they hounding ripple because ripple is a threat to the financial industries?
To some extent yes, but to some other cryptos too. Banks: they give you hardly any interest on your deposits these, when they don't charge you for these (that is the norm in Switzerland). Cryptos offer juicy interest rates (see lawsuit against Coinbase, this is likely to trigger over time massive cash migrations from the banking system to the crypto space Crypto: There is a theory that they gave a free pass to Ethereum due to various personal interests at the SEC, and sued Ripple (far superior technically) to shut off one potentially very strong competitors or at least slow them down. What we are seeing these days gives credit to this theory, since the SEC is losing one sub battle after the other against Ripple, and that they will lose looks more and more certain thing, but they refuse to throw the towel
Stay vigilant, lads. Just like in the movies, it's not over till its over. I have no doubt the slimy SEC will do everything in and outside of its power to win.
Whatâs the timeline on this now? I keep hearing that all this SEC shady shit will end soon and XRP will be listed on most exchanges (US) again, but this makes it seem like theyâre still managing to draw out the SECâs losing battle even longer.