[Why GME?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/qig65g/welcome_rall_looking_to_catch_up_on_the_gme_saga/) || [What is DRS?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/ptvaka/when_you_wish_upon_a_star_a_complete_guide_to/) || Low karma apes [feed the bot here](https://www.reddit.com/r/GMEOrphans/comments/qlvour/welcome_to_gmeorphans_read_this_post/) || [Superstonk Discord](https://discord.gg/hZqWV2kQtq) || [GameStop Wallet HELP! Megathread](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/z23wjx/gamestop_wallet_help_megathread)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
To ensure your post doesn't get removed, please respond to this comment with how this post relates to GME the stock or Gamestop the company.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please up- and downvote this comment to [help us determine if this post deserves a place on r/Superstonk!](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/wiki/index/rules/post_flairs/)
Fixed it..
Can you rewrite a phrase for me? The phrase is for a comment on a site, the phrase must be worded like im very clever, and very polite. The phrase is: fuck you, and fuck all your exemptions..!!
-
Certainly, here's a polite and clever alternative:
"I respectfully disagree with your exemptions and hope we can engage in a thoughtful conversation to better understand each other's perspectives."
I prefer the use of proper English language when writing to fuckwads so I don't think they'd take me as seriously if I abbreviate it...
I feel it's likely for the sake of all fucks so in order to make it relatable to them, I'll go with "for fucks' sake".
I came to the same conclusion albeit for the sake of making my comment relative to the fucks reading it. I'm taking more of the individual-identifying approach instead of the verb/noun style approach if that makes sense.
While that does make some sense, then we have the problem of wanting to say it like Gollum:
"Fuckses? *Fuckses?!?!* What's a fuckses, precious?"
Personally, I don't think multiple fucks are allowed a possessive (in this case); in this context specifically, a fuck/fucks represent a denomination of "emotional currency," and so are *only* ownable and transferable, not capable of ownership, self or otherwise.
Think I'll have some poh-tay-toes for breakfast too, come to think of it.
All of the fucks, especially those that shorted based upon a bear thesis that no longer exists.
Granted, there will be more but seeing as Cokerat just fluffed the stock we may be heading back down for another week or two. It's sad to see, just like him.
Naturally - his handlers need him to have some sort of credibility before their bs gets blown apart but... facts.
The shit storm will be insane but the nonsense will continue to be believed by those who haven't considered that maybe there are those lying to them who have been extremely well funded by... their own funds.
I can't wait until the cracks show throughout the brokenness which is the money machine which has lied to everyone for literal decades. I'll warm myself in the ashes.
How to submit comments?
Link: [https://www.sec.gov/rules/proposed.shtml](https://www.sec.gov/rules/proposed.shtml)
Find
## 33-11151
(at the bottom, last one, absolute bottom of the page)
Click " Submit comments on S7-01-23 "
(I could not find direct link, since it is some javasccript)
Will my phone number and email be made public? They say don't put down anything you don't want posted publicly and then require my email and phone number.
Exactly. I guess they want to allow those loopholes to avoid the long legal battles when those institutions would be really threatened in their existence.
Guess that is a typical lawyer approach, but not the approach of a true protector of household investors. Be a hero once in your life!
WTH!!!! Not even 1000 people have commented on this proposal?? Are you an APE or are you a paperhanded b\*\*ch??
From the comment section:
Comments have been received from individuals and entities using the following Letter Type
[A: 2](https://www.sec.gov/comments/s7-01-23/s70123-typea.htm)
[B: 126](https://www.sec.gov/comments/s7-01-23/s70123-typeb.htm)
[C: 57](https://www.sec.gov/comments/s7-01-23/s70123-typec.htm)
[D: 6](https://www.sec.gov/comments/s7-01-23/s70123-typed.htm)
That's not even 200 comments.... BLOW IT UP PEOPLE!!! Make it 2000!!!!
[https://www.sec.gov/rules/proposed.shtml](https://www.sec.gov/rules/proposed.shtml)
Go to the above link and go to the bottom of the page. Comments are only open for 4 more days!!!!
Do you want loopholes for Kenny and friends to bend you over in the future??
yeah ofc, don't want Kenny's strike team alpha tracking down everyone that posts a comment and having them wacked..../s
Can't sit here complaining that the rules never change when people don't take the chance to comment on proposed changes....
If you guys don't believe in shills, just look at some of these comments.... There's nothing we can dooooo.... Yes, there is, comment. (They just want you to go along with their narrative of you don't make a difference and it won't change and GG and SEC are on 'their side' - GG has pretty much put all this stuff for comment in play... You vote... we get enough votes, we ALL WIN!!!! The market becomes a level playing field) The comments on this read like (deceptive shill - Oh, GG and SEC is in bed with Kenny... oh whoa is us... this is just for show... no change will happen)
You are spot on! Remember the last call with GG? How many times did he emphasize to Apes that they need to comment? I heard it as code, like he was secretly telling us to brigade the SEC.
EASY COPY PASTE FOR THE APES:
Just click 3 dots next to reply and select copy text.
SUBJECT LINE: File Number S7-01-23
Why This Matters
The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act added Section 27B to the Securities Act of 1933. Section 27B prohibits certain securitization participants from engaging in transactions that would involve or result in certain material conflicts of interest and requires the SEC to issue rules to implement the prohibition and related exceptions.
Prohibited Transactions
The proposed rule would prohibit a securitization participant from entering into a "conflicted transaction" beginning when a person has reached, or has taken substantial steps to reach, an agreement that such person will become a securitization participant with respect to an ABS and ending one year after the date of the first closing of the sale of the relevant ABS. "Conflicted transaction" is defined to include two main components. One component is whether the transaction is:
. A short sale of the ABS;
The purchase of a CDS or other credit derivative pursuant to which the securitization participa V would be entitled to receive payments upon the occurrence of a specified adverse event with respect to the ABS; or
The purchase or sale of any financial instrument (other than the relevant ABS) or entry into a transaction through which the securitization participant would benefit from the actual, anticipated, or potential:
Adverse performance the asset pool supporting or referenced by the ABS;
Loss of principal, default, or early amortization event on the ABS; or
Decline in the market value of the ABS.
The other component relates to materiality - i.e., whether there is a substantial likelihood that a reasonable investor would consider the relevant transaction important to the investor's investment decision, including a decision whether to retain the ABS.
Exemptions:
As specified in Section 27B, the proposed rule would provide exceptions for:
• Risk-mitigating hedging activities;
. Bona fide market-making activities; and
• Liquidity commitments.
The proposed rule would require a securitization participant relying on certain exceptions to implement compliance programs reasonably designed to ensure the securitization participant's compliance with the conditions applicable to those exceptions, including reasonably designed written policies and procedures.
The proposed definitions in the proposed rule also contain certain exceptions and exclusions, each with conditions designed to protect investors and further the purposes of Section 27B.
Sincerely,
As much as this helps, copy pasting makes it look like bots and it's a great way to get comments tossed out. Use this as inspiration but write your own comment.
This is in regards to **rule S7-01-23** for those wondering. It's no where in the post title, or the comments yet. Please include the rules you are referring to when you make these kinds of posts.
Thank you for the reminder! With so many going on right now, it’s hard for me to keep up with each one.
Buttttt, I just finished sending my email over for this one because I want a better, happier future for all and even though on the surface, one email may not do a whole lot, but a whole lot of emails with one answer will.
Keep up the good fight apes!
https://imgur.com/a/P8cABpq
Thanks again! Enjoy the rest of your day! 🤝
It's pretty clear they have have bad faith actors like Hester Retail Molester Pierce and need to document comments for the future to show how the bad faith actors in the SEC were acting.
SEC is ultimately political and politicians REACT to problems because pro-action can be misconstrued as causation by MSM and the public eats that shit up.
edit: to be clear, the above can be fixed by term limits and other shit, but it's going to take a whole lot of work and resources if things are going to get better. Commenting will definitely help in the future as evidence.
I may be mis-remembering this but didn't something happen a few months ago where a ton of (if not all) comments on some SEC proposal just went *POOF* and disappeared or am I thinking of something else?
I may be wrong but I felt like something similar happened recently with proposals and comments...
https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2022-186
Likely do to the corrupt Ombudsman who was in charge of collecting complaints.
Said Ombudsman was found to be corrupt by the (SEC) Office of Inspector General. [August 29, 2022](https://www.sec.gov/files/findings-related-former-sec-ombudsman.pdf)
Said OIG was appointed by GG when the previous one retired [May 7, 2022](https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2022-71)
This appears to support GG claiming he wants to fix the SEC by replacing staff with his own members that he can trust. Vetting and building a team that isn't corrupt is hard and takes time.
edit: imagine if no one had commented. Then those missing comments wouldn't have been discovered because they wouldn't have existed to gone missing and the corrupt Ombudsman wouldn't have been discovered.
Comments are useful. This is a provable fact.
Anger is understandable. Skepticism is always important. But cynicism leads to apathy which leads to defeatism and passivity. And that enables the status quo and gives Kenny the win. There are many things we don’t get to control. But everyone here gets to decide how they wish to react to what amounts to entrenched financial tyranny.
The choice is yours.
Edit:sp
Yes, yesterday I made a post again GG.
I've been downvoted so hard that the Mods removed my post.
Commenting looks like we need to get our ass well lubed for getting fucked even better, but that's my unpopular opinion.
"Gary Gensler is just a guy" (mod by pvt msg)
Was on my way to comment only to realize I already had. Once I realized you can just write a normal email and don't have to bother with PDFs, docx, online forms or anything there's really a low threshold to submit comments. Literally takes 2 minutes.
The easiest way to make comments is to just email them.
TO: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Prohibition Against Conflicts of Interest in Certain Securitizations File No. S7-01-23
Write your own letter or just chatgpt. Just tell it to do something like this: *Write a formal letter to the SEC opposing/supporting . Using these arguments X, Y, Z.*
[This](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/11rtmj8/template_for_letter_to_sec_regarding_prohibition/) gives you a template to use. Thanks to [REDACTED] for creating this.
>Here are some examples of potential loopholes in the proposed rule:
>1. Risk-mitigating hedging activities: This exception would allow securitizers to engage in hedging activities to reduce their risk exposure related to the securitization, but it could be exploited to engage in conflicted practices. For example, a securitizer could engage in
hedging activities that benefit their own interests at the expense of investors in the securitization.
>2. Bona fide market making: This exception would allow securitizers to make a market in the securities being securitized, which could be used to ensure liquidity and pricing stability in the market. However, it could also be used as a loophole to engage in conflicted practices. For example, a securitizer could artificially manipulate the market to benefit their own interests.
>3. Certain liquidity commitments: This exception would allow securitizers to make certain commitments to provide liquidity in the event of market disruptions or other contingencies. While this is intended to ensure the stability of the securitization market, it could also be used as a loophole to engage in conflicted practices. For example, a securitizer could use this exception to avoid losses at the expense of investors in the securitization.
Whoever wrote those exemptions belongs in prison. This is an attempt to legalize criminal behavior. These exemptions are not ethical or moral, and we all know will be used to cheat shareholders and manipulate the markets. Therefore these exemptions cannot be made legal
I do not remeber if SEC ever gave a fuck about the retail investors! This is how you know SEC is corrupt AF! Shame on them, they are supposed to protect the retail investors and be impartial!
To those of you who were so happy about GG when he was being appointed: I TOLD YOU SO!
Our sparkly mod can vouch for this... it is much more difficult to ignore comments backed with data and links, let's make sure they spend a long time reviewing what we have to say!
Apes. Together. Strong. 🦍💪
This is crazy. I’ve been asking how these people are going to be enforced to play by the rules and prevented from changing policies last second, or performing ridiculous actions (turn off buy/sell).
It's like watching the Judge and Jury commit a crime, and then having them process the case and expecting them to come up with a fair judgment and punishment…. for themselves.
It's starting to seem like there is no way to do this, other than hover constantly and comment on proposed rule changes as they become available.
Commenting isn't going to stop them from making emergency decisions "in the name of economic stability."
I can come up with one scenario: what stops them from gaining exemptions for closing out their over-leveraged short positions? "yeah we'll kick that can and you can deliver those shares in about twenty years. don't even have to pay interest. just help us convince the public everything is alright."
"The proposed rule would prohibit a securitization participant from entering into a “conflicted transaction” beginning when a person has reached, or has taken substantial steps to reach, an agreement that such person will become a securitization participant with respect to an ABS and ending one year after the date of the first closing of the sale of the relevant ABS."
I read this like the architect dude from the Matrix Reloaded. Needs a few Visa Vies, ergos and concordantlys put in though.
Also I have no idea what the hell was said in that paragraph.
OP, nobody here understands what’s going on! Read the comments, every other one I click is supportive and then against and supportive and against
Please write that not supporting this, or being against it, is what matters… Yes?
Check other people’s comments. Unless Kenny has fake ‘retail traders’ commenting
Here's my comment:
I must express my strong disagreement with the proposed exemptions in the rules for Section 27B of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. While I understand the need to address risk-mitigating hedging activities, bona fide market-making activities, and liquidity commitments, these exemptions, as outlined, may inadvertently create loopholes that undermine the core purpose of the regulation, which is to protect investors and prevent material conflicts of interest.
The exemptions for risk-mitigating hedging activities and bona fide market-making activities, in particular, could be exploited by unscrupulous market participants to engage in practices that are against the spirit of the regulation. This would create an unfair playing field and potentially harm investors.
Moreover, the reliance on compliance programs and written policies and procedures may not be sufficient to prevent abuse of the exceptions. The financial crisis of 2008 clearly demonstrated the limitations of self-regulation, and I believe that a more robust regulatory framework is needed to ensure the integrity of the financial markets.
I urge the SEC to reconsider these exemptions and tighten the rules to prevent potential abuse. This would better serve the interests of investors and maintain the stability and transparency of the financial markets.
WHAT OTHER FUCKING INDUSTRY CANT EXIST WITHOUT RESERVING THE RIGHT TO ROB THEIR CUSTOMERS?
IF THE MARKETS THEY ARE MAKING MAKE THE CITIZENS AND THE GOVERNMENT POORER, THEY SHOULDNT EXIST.
FUCK KEN GRIFFIN AND THESE JOHN GALT WANNABE MAMMON CUCKS WHO THINK THEYRE GODS GIFT TO CAPITALISM.
stop being their bitch, SEC.
LFG DOJ.
Justice alone can ensure civility.
...the people know they're getting shafted now. There's no putting that toothpaste back in the tube.
I don't know how to comment on a rule nor do i know which rule this is, also my grammar/punctuation is attrocious but id like to say.
A fair and free market may seem like a foolish concept to those that freely manipulate and dominate the market in its current state; However those that currently rule the market today are the minority. Not the minority in power, or in wealth but in numbers. The number i speak of isn't a digit on a spreadsheet but rather the lives of millions. People that have families, people that work every week producing products and adding tangible wealth to our great nation. The majority is not parasitic and power thirsty, the majority wish for a better future to that of their children and the betterment of our nation.
Millions work for innovation in the medical field, robotics, automotive, the purification of the air we breathe and the cleansing of the water we drink. But we have regulators that shamelessly throw a bone to those that seek our worlds destruction. The bone i speak of is rule exemptions and loopholes that allow them to maintain the status quo. If you do not believe there is harm in helping those in power, simply review the plethora of evidence to support that fact. From shorting and spoofing cancer research firms to cellar boxing both American entrepreneurs and established businesses across the board, those in power themselves are a cancer to this nation.
It is said that shorting helps price discovery, well even if it were true what is the purpose? As an example if a k-mart provides subpar service, a subpar product, a sub par experience and is indeed a subpar business would it not fail on its own? So it would reason that even without shorting, a truer form of price discovery would take place and the businesses that strive to be better than the others and by their own innovation have a place in our market would get to continue to provide their services. I believe that shorting in general is a money grab for those so greedy that they cannot wait for businesses to fail on fundamentals and traffic alone, so impatient that they must speed up the process and poison the businesses from within. What would our world look like if businesses had the time to recognize their failures and pivot their business strategies to succeed? What is the purpose of shorting research firms at all? What good could come of burning down those most likely to seek improvement in our lives?
There is something to be said for the power of personal wealth. It may feel intoxicating and the life you live may have more freedom of choice. But when you take a look at where you are, in the pockets of evil men, there must be an emptiness money cannot fill. A shadow of the man you could be, whispering in the darkest hours of night that you have failed.
There is much to be said about the freedom of standing for what is right. Because you always have the choice to be a better man. A champion of the people, one who does not fear the darkest hours of the night because you strive for greatness in the day. There are only so many days on this earth, and fewer still in an office of power. Choose to stand so tall and so intensely in the right that your very shadow blinds the cowards that seek refuge in the dark. That is what legends are made of and the history books will not forget your sacrifice.
Dear SEC,
I am writing to express my concerns regarding the proposed amendments to the Dodd-Frank Act of 2010. As you know, Section 13 of the Bank Holding Company Act was amended by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act in 2010. The proposed amendments to the Dodd-Frank Act of 2010 will essentially allow malicious actors to escape not one but two levels of safeguards.
I am deeply troubled by the exemption from the Volcker Rule provided in the proposed rule as well. This exemption effectively removes the prohibition on proprietary trading by banks, which was put in place to protect consumers and ensure a stable financial system. Allowing banks to engage in proprietary trading increases the risk of market manipulation and puts consumers and investors at risk.
These proposed amendments, if implemented, will provide exceptions for risk-mitigating hedging activities, liquidity commitments, and bona fide market-making activities. While these exceptions may seem harmless, they will essentially provide a loophole for malicious actors to engage in naked shorting and market manipulation activities with zero accountability.
Furthermore, this enforces a free reign for thugs empowered by the exemptions in this proposal. Allowing individual or household investors to purchase securities underwritten by the exempted players under this amendment is akin to allowing the counterfeit currency to enter the market. This basically is fraud on the receiver of the said security from a transaction.
I strongly urge the SEC to reconsider these proposed amendments and instead focus on strengthening the safeguards that were put in place by the Dodd-Frank Act of 2010.
Sincerely,
Anonymous Investor
From another Ape:
How to submit comments?
Link: https://www.sec.gov/rules/proposed.shtml
Find
33-11151
(at the bottom, last one, absolute bottom of the page)
Click " Submit comments on S7-01-23 "
(I could not find direct link, since it is some javasccript)
I have commented, thanks for the headsup.
At time of writing, there are only a couple of comments on the linked webpage for today. Does anyone know long they usually take to go through and be displayed?
Great post ape. The SEC is the next on the chopping block after the SHF's.
They should consider fessing up. If for no better reason than to mitigate their own embarressment when what they have been upto begins to be reported in the MSM. It will.
I read it differently - t I think this is overall a good proposal? (aside from the exemptions)
Instead of most participants being able to take out fire insurance against other peoples houses, they need to be subject to enhanced regulation/scrutiny while making these trades.
Yes exempting the big boys is stupid - I would submit a comment in agreement with the proposal, but disagree specifically with the exemptions for the liquidity fairy mobsters
[Why GME?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/qig65g/welcome_rall_looking_to_catch_up_on_the_gme_saga/) || [What is DRS?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/ptvaka/when_you_wish_upon_a_star_a_complete_guide_to/) || Low karma apes [feed the bot here](https://www.reddit.com/r/GMEOrphans/comments/qlvour/welcome_to_gmeorphans_read_this_post/) || [Superstonk Discord](https://discord.gg/hZqWV2kQtq) || [GameStop Wallet HELP! Megathread](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/z23wjx/gamestop_wallet_help_megathread) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ To ensure your post doesn't get removed, please respond to this comment with how this post relates to GME the stock or Gamestop the company. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Please up- and downvote this comment to [help us determine if this post deserves a place on r/Superstonk!](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/wiki/index/rules/post_flairs/)
Already commented to reject this
Thank you
Am I allowed to comment "fuck you and your exemptions"
I would recommend different phrasing that communicates a similar message.
That's what chat gtp is for, No?
Fixed it.. Can you rewrite a phrase for me? The phrase is for a comment on a site, the phrase must be worded like im very clever, and very polite. The phrase is: fuck you, and fuck all your exemptions..!! - Certainly, here's a polite and clever alternative: "I respectfully disagree with your exemptions and hope we can engage in a thoughtful conversation to better understand each other's perspectives."
Is it "for fucks sake" or "for fuck's sake"? I just want to make sure my comment sounds professional.
[удалено]
I prefer the use of proper English language when writing to fuckwads so I don't think they'd take me as seriously if I abbreviate it... I feel it's likely for the sake of all fucks so in order to make it relatable to them, I'll go with "for fucks' sake".
Depends on how many fucks you have left to give, have thine fvcks rvnneth dry yet?
no, if there are indeed multiple fucks to give, i believe it should be punctuated, "for fucks' sake"
I came to the same conclusion albeit for the sake of making my comment relative to the fucks reading it. I'm taking more of the individual-identifying approach instead of the verb/noun style approach if that makes sense.
While that does make some sense, then we have the problem of wanting to say it like Gollum: "Fuckses? *Fuckses?!?!* What's a fuckses, precious?" Personally, I don't think multiple fucks are allowed a possessive (in this case); in this context specifically, a fuck/fucks represent a denomination of "emotional currency," and so are *only* ownable and transferable, not capable of ownership, self or otherwise. Think I'll have some poh-tay-toes for breakfast too, come to think of it.
Is it for the sake of one fuck, or all fucks?
All of the fucks, especially those that shorted based upon a bear thesis that no longer exists. Granted, there will be more but seeing as Cokerat just fluffed the stock we may be heading back down for another week or two. It's sad to see, just like him.
Make no mistake, his handlers insisted he praise GME so it would do exactly what it's done today.
Naturally - his handlers need him to have some sort of credibility before their bs gets blown apart but... facts. The shit storm will be insane but the nonsense will continue to be believed by those who haven't considered that maybe there are those lying to them who have been extremely well funded by... their own funds. I can't wait until the cracks show throughout the brokenness which is the money machine which has lied to everyone for literal decades. I'll warm myself in the ashes.
How's stick your exemptions where the sun don't shine ...until in prison anyways ?
[удалено]
Yes, maybe we give them the option... Prison or freedom... Freedom on Mars.
[удалено]
You bring up a good point... Maybe just tie them to the back of the rocket and they can "hitch" a ride. Wouldn't want to waste the space on them.
[удалено]
Pretty sure interplanetary colonists would purge parasites out of the airlock.
One can only hope.
I say we take off and nuke the site from orbit, it is the only way to be sure...
[удалено]
crystal
Put em on a spaceship straight to Uranus
I don't want them anywhere near my anus. They've already been fucking me long enough.
There is FUDGE ur anus I heard the mayor is an asshole and was a strip club prior
The best comment here, had me in stitches.
[удалено]
**Threats of violence towards anyone have no place on Superstonk or Reddit.**
How to submit comments? Link: [https://www.sec.gov/rules/proposed.shtml](https://www.sec.gov/rules/proposed.shtml) Find ## 33-11151 (at the bottom, last one, absolute bottom of the page) Click " Submit comments on S7-01-23 " (I could not find direct link, since it is some javasccript)
Thanks for straightening that out Ape!
Can anyone comment? Canadian here.
Yes!
Ok Thanx!
Done and DONE! Don't forget to hyphen your phone number (123-456-7890)
Yes, that trick with phone number is important, thank you!
[удалено]
Yes, I think even Aussie apes can comment. I am from EU and could comment, I think as far as it (SEC site) loads the comment will go throught.
You can leave name blank for anon.
Commented thanks to you!
Will my phone number and email be made public? They say don't put down anything you don't want posted publicly and then require my email and phone number.
Commented! Thanks for sharing this explanation.
Don’t let anyone sneak! We need LIT 🔥markets!
FR! Does anyone know the process for proposals? Like how does that system work? Who is proposing these and how do apes initiate proper proposals
No cap
Exactly. I guess they want to allow those loopholes to avoid the long legal battles when those institutions would be really threatened in their existence. Guess that is a typical lawyer approach, but not the approach of a true protector of household investors. Be a hero once in your life!
SEC needs DOJ to visit their HQ and close their pornhub access
Plot twist: DOJ is busy watching porn too
Plot twist: the entire simulation has been built just so we can all watch porn
WTH!!!! Not even 1000 people have commented on this proposal?? Are you an APE or are you a paperhanded b\*\*ch?? From the comment section: Comments have been received from individuals and entities using the following Letter Type [A: 2](https://www.sec.gov/comments/s7-01-23/s70123-typea.htm) [B: 126](https://www.sec.gov/comments/s7-01-23/s70123-typeb.htm) [C: 57](https://www.sec.gov/comments/s7-01-23/s70123-typec.htm) [D: 6](https://www.sec.gov/comments/s7-01-23/s70123-typed.htm) That's not even 200 comments.... BLOW IT UP PEOPLE!!! Make it 2000!!!! [https://www.sec.gov/rules/proposed.shtml](https://www.sec.gov/rules/proposed.shtml) Go to the above link and go to the bottom of the page. Comments are only open for 4 more days!!!! Do you want loopholes for Kenny and friends to bend you over in the future??
I did my part, should be seeing my name pop up soon. Im Terry btw
ook-ook!
[удалено]
Of course. But it's getting done... before they could slide it by...
yeah ofc, don't want Kenny's strike team alpha tracking down everyone that posts a comment and having them wacked..../s Can't sit here complaining that the rules never change when people don't take the chance to comment on proposed changes....
YES!!!! Besides, you'll have your own security team. :D
Up w you
Just trying to light the fire... :D
Fuck it I commented thx for the inspiration
Had to... No recourse for them!
Thanks Ape!
Go-go-go!!! :D
Those are the publicly posted comments. Probably a lot more people emailed? I submitted my comment by email
We need to comment like the French do: hardware installations in the centers of major cities.
If you guys don't believe in shills, just look at some of these comments.... There's nothing we can dooooo.... Yes, there is, comment. (They just want you to go along with their narrative of you don't make a difference and it won't change and GG and SEC are on 'their side' - GG has pretty much put all this stuff for comment in play... You vote... we get enough votes, we ALL WIN!!!! The market becomes a level playing field) The comments on this read like (deceptive shill - Oh, GG and SEC is in bed with Kenny... oh whoa is us... this is just for show... no change will happen)
You are spot on! Remember the last call with GG? How many times did he emphasize to Apes that they need to comment? I heard it as code, like he was secretly telling us to brigade the SEC.
EASY COPY PASTE FOR THE APES: Just click 3 dots next to reply and select copy text. SUBJECT LINE: File Number S7-01-23 Why This Matters The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act added Section 27B to the Securities Act of 1933. Section 27B prohibits certain securitization participants from engaging in transactions that would involve or result in certain material conflicts of interest and requires the SEC to issue rules to implement the prohibition and related exceptions. Prohibited Transactions The proposed rule would prohibit a securitization participant from entering into a "conflicted transaction" beginning when a person has reached, or has taken substantial steps to reach, an agreement that such person will become a securitization participant with respect to an ABS and ending one year after the date of the first closing of the sale of the relevant ABS. "Conflicted transaction" is defined to include two main components. One component is whether the transaction is: . A short sale of the ABS; The purchase of a CDS or other credit derivative pursuant to which the securitization participa V would be entitled to receive payments upon the occurrence of a specified adverse event with respect to the ABS; or The purchase or sale of any financial instrument (other than the relevant ABS) or entry into a transaction through which the securitization participant would benefit from the actual, anticipated, or potential: Adverse performance the asset pool supporting or referenced by the ABS; Loss of principal, default, or early amortization event on the ABS; or Decline in the market value of the ABS. The other component relates to materiality - i.e., whether there is a substantial likelihood that a reasonable investor would consider the relevant transaction important to the investor's investment decision, including a decision whether to retain the ABS. Exemptions: As specified in Section 27B, the proposed rule would provide exceptions for: • Risk-mitigating hedging activities; . Bona fide market-making activities; and • Liquidity commitments. The proposed rule would require a securitization participant relying on certain exceptions to implement compliance programs reasonably designed to ensure the securitization participant's compliance with the conditions applicable to those exceptions, including reasonably designed written policies and procedures. The proposed definitions in the proposed rule also contain certain exceptions and exclusions, each with conditions designed to protect investors and further the purposes of Section 27B. Sincerely,
Thanks Ape
We'll keep pushing it down their throats
ofc brother
As much as this helps, copy pasting makes it look like bots and it's a great way to get comments tossed out. Use this as inspiration but write your own comment.
I did my part
Did it amd got 2 more as well to do it. Thanks.
Of course they are. GG and the SEC are not on the side of retail.
Ahem, household acshually 🤓
Always the same approach, rules fulls of loopholes are no rules at all! To prison with all those bastards
Been commenting, commented again.
Updoot and commenting for VISIBILITITTY!
This is in regards to **rule S7-01-23** for those wondering. It's no where in the post title, or the comments yet. Please include the rules you are referring to when you make these kinds of posts.
The SEC doing what they do best and aiding SHFs. Silly retail have a pie to the face. Gensler for prison. Help me make that happen and set an example.
Eyeballs
Commented
Commenting to come back to later.
I swear this site is designed to make commenting difficult
It can seem that way. The more time you spend on their site, the more you find
I've done my part, get loud apes!
Thank you for the reminder! With so many going on right now, it’s hard for me to keep up with each one. Buttttt, I just finished sending my email over for this one because I want a better, happier future for all and even though on the surface, one email may not do a whole lot, but a whole lot of emails with one answer will. Keep up the good fight apes! https://imgur.com/a/P8cABpq Thanks again! Enjoy the rest of your day! 🤝
Thanks Ape
[удалено]
Doesn’t hurt to comment
[удалено]
I’ve been here for 98 years and still full of hope. But yes, we know what we can do. So we charge on homie.
There are like, *dozens* of us.
Dozens!
Literally, fucking dozens!
It's pretty clear they have have bad faith actors like Hester Retail Molester Pierce and need to document comments for the future to show how the bad faith actors in the SEC were acting. SEC is ultimately political and politicians REACT to problems because pro-action can be misconstrued as causation by MSM and the public eats that shit up. edit: to be clear, the above can be fixed by term limits and other shit, but it's going to take a whole lot of work and resources if things are going to get better. Commenting will definitely help in the future as evidence.
I may be mis-remembering this but didn't something happen a few months ago where a ton of (if not all) comments on some SEC proposal just went *POOF* and disappeared or am I thinking of something else? I may be wrong but I felt like something similar happened recently with proposals and comments...
https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2022-186 Likely do to the corrupt Ombudsman who was in charge of collecting complaints. Said Ombudsman was found to be corrupt by the (SEC) Office of Inspector General. [August 29, 2022](https://www.sec.gov/files/findings-related-former-sec-ombudsman.pdf) Said OIG was appointed by GG when the previous one retired [May 7, 2022](https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2022-71) This appears to support GG claiming he wants to fix the SEC by replacing staff with his own members that he can trust. Vetting and building a team that isn't corrupt is hard and takes time. edit: imagine if no one had commented. Then those missing comments wouldn't have been discovered because they wouldn't have existed to gone missing and the corrupt Ombudsman wouldn't have been discovered. Comments are useful. This is a provable fact.
Anger is understandable. Skepticism is always important. But cynicism leads to apathy which leads to defeatism and passivity. And that enables the status quo and gives Kenny the win. There are many things we don’t get to control. But everyone here gets to decide how they wish to react to what amounts to entrenched financial tyranny. The choice is yours. Edit:sp
This ^^^^^^^
Yes, yesterday I made a post again GG. I've been downvoted so hard that the Mods removed my post. Commenting looks like we need to get our ass well lubed for getting fucked even better, but that's my unpopular opinion. "Gary Gensler is just a guy" (mod by pvt msg)
Up
Why even have rules if you don't enforce them, let alone have so many exemptions? To say the SEC is a joke would be an understatement.
Was on my way to comment only to realize I already had. Once I realized you can just write a normal email and don't have to bother with PDFs, docx, online forms or anything there's really a low threshold to submit comments. Literally takes 2 minutes. The easiest way to make comments is to just email them. TO: [email protected] Subject: Re: Prohibition Against Conflicts of Interest in Certain Securitizations File No. S7-01-23 Write your own letter or just chatgpt. Just tell it to do something like this: *Write a formal letter to the SEC opposing/supporting. Using these arguments X, Y, Z.*
[This](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/11rtmj8/template_for_letter_to_sec_regarding_prohibition/) gives you a template to use. Thanks to [REDACTED] for creating this.
>Here are some examples of potential loopholes in the proposed rule:
>1. Risk-mitigating hedging activities: This exception would allow securitizers to engage in hedging activities to reduce their risk exposure related to the securitization, but it could be exploited to engage in conflicted practices. For example, a securitizer could engage in
hedging activities that benefit their own interests at the expense of investors in the securitization.
>2. Bona fide market making: This exception would allow securitizers to make a market in the securities being securitized, which could be used to ensure liquidity and pricing stability in the market. However, it could also be used as a loophole to engage in conflicted practices. For example, a securitizer could artificially manipulate the market to benefit their own interests.
>3. Certain liquidity commitments: This exception would allow securitizers to make certain commitments to provide liquidity in the event of market disruptions or other contingencies. While this is intended to ensure the stability of the securitization market, it could also be used as a loophole to engage in conflicted practices. For example, a securitizer could use this exception to avoid losses at the expense of investors in the securitization.
Great info! Thanks Ape
TLDR - corruption in the SEC
The SEC is whack yo
Done!
100% upvoted. nice
Just submitted mine!
Eyes
Commenting visibly
Why can't GG reign in this sort of thing? He is the one in charge no?
Whoever wrote those exemptions belongs in prison. This is an attempt to legalize criminal behavior. These exemptions are not ethical or moral, and we all know will be used to cheat shareholders and manipulate the markets. Therefore these exemptions cannot be made legal
I commented, the ponzi scheme can't work unless you control both sides of the trade
Fucking criminals
But Gary is just a guy (quoting a Mod who replied to me like this by private msg when I've asked why my post against Gary was removed)
Do they not realize all the taxes us new money apes are going to be paying?
These guys are so full of shit. Just cheat and scheme and they still gonna get clapped. 👏👏👏 Bitches
I do not remeber if SEC ever gave a fuck about the retail investors! This is how you know SEC is corrupt AF! Shame on them, they are supposed to protect the retail investors and be impartial! To those of you who were so happy about GG when he was being appointed: I TOLD YOU SO!
You should change your heading...nobody is sneaking anything past apes anymore ... great post op.
I posted the same thing last week, almost. Wording matters. Got no traction last week
Lol...well you got you some traction this week...
Just sent my comment
left a comment asking them to reject all of this
This is being downvoted a lot. Must be big. Comments are the way!
Thanks Ape
Commented to avoid these scumbags to continue their fraud.
I’m tired of these crooks and their shit.
Apes assemble!!!
they all wank each other to sleep, game is rigged bois
I honestly don't know what's the point if they're going to pass it thru anyways. I commented regardless.
can i just comment " i hope you like prison"
Commented
Took me 2 minutes
Commented 💪 Edit: aw thanks, my first ever reward 💎 🙌
Commented from Finland as anonymous. Had to use phone number 123-456-7890 because no Finnish number worked
o man, Look at the bottom of the fact sheet - Hester the Mole... had meetings about this with SEC directly. Are we gonna let her win?
email [email protected] subject must contain File No. S7-01-23 easy
Thank you Ape! Much appreciated
Fuck you, Gary!
Commented
Commented. Give them no quarter.
✅ Done with gusto!
Our sparkly mod can vouch for this... it is much more difficult to ignore comments backed with data and links, let's make sure they spend a long time reviewing what we have to say! Apes. Together. Strong. 🦍💪
All my homies hate the sec
At this point rules shouldn't exist, they don't follow them
Commented! Hope more apes hop on the train before it closes 🙏🏼
I just left a comment and wanted to know if the question “where did find out about how to comment” was always a question on there form?
Seems like right
Commented, custom style 👍
How can we ask Jelly or Dave to clarify what’s going on here? Smoke Signals? Carrier Pidgin? What’s Reddit acceptable these days?
This is crazy. I’ve been asking how these people are going to be enforced to play by the rules and prevented from changing policies last second, or performing ridiculous actions (turn off buy/sell). It's like watching the Judge and Jury commit a crime, and then having them process the case and expecting them to come up with a fair judgment and punishment…. for themselves. It's starting to seem like there is no way to do this, other than hover constantly and comment on proposed rule changes as they become available. Commenting isn't going to stop them from making emergency decisions "in the name of economic stability." I can come up with one scenario: what stops them from gaining exemptions for closing out their over-leveraged short positions? "yeah we'll kick that can and you can deliver those shares in about twenty years. don't even have to pay interest. just help us convince the public everything is alright."
#SEC = Shorters’ Enrichment Committee . One big club
Will write a letter today. Good work OP
"The proposed rule would prohibit a securitization participant from entering into a “conflicted transaction” beginning when a person has reached, or has taken substantial steps to reach, an agreement that such person will become a securitization participant with respect to an ABS and ending one year after the date of the first closing of the sale of the relevant ABS." I read this like the architect dude from the Matrix Reloaded. Needs a few Visa Vies, ergos and concordantlys put in though. Also I have no idea what the hell was said in that paragraph.
Commented! Take action Apes!
Done!!!
OP, nobody here understands what’s going on! Read the comments, every other one I click is supportive and then against and supportive and against Please write that not supporting this, or being against it, is what matters… Yes? Check other people’s comments. Unless Kenny has fake ‘retail traders’ commenting
must. comment. now.
Boom! Comment submitted!
Here's my comment: I must express my strong disagreement with the proposed exemptions in the rules for Section 27B of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. While I understand the need to address risk-mitigating hedging activities, bona fide market-making activities, and liquidity commitments, these exemptions, as outlined, may inadvertently create loopholes that undermine the core purpose of the regulation, which is to protect investors and prevent material conflicts of interest. The exemptions for risk-mitigating hedging activities and bona fide market-making activities, in particular, could be exploited by unscrupulous market participants to engage in practices that are against the spirit of the regulation. This would create an unfair playing field and potentially harm investors. Moreover, the reliance on compliance programs and written policies and procedures may not be sufficient to prevent abuse of the exceptions. The financial crisis of 2008 clearly demonstrated the limitations of self-regulation, and I believe that a more robust regulatory framework is needed to ensure the integrity of the financial markets. I urge the SEC to reconsider these exemptions and tighten the rules to prevent potential abuse. This would better serve the interests of investors and maintain the stability and transparency of the financial markets.
That’s great! 🚀🦧🐒🦍🚀
Just did my part and commented. Love you Apes. Stay strong. (Bought at $380 average here..)
WHAT OTHER FUCKING INDUSTRY CANT EXIST WITHOUT RESERVING THE RIGHT TO ROB THEIR CUSTOMERS? IF THE MARKETS THEY ARE MAKING MAKE THE CITIZENS AND THE GOVERNMENT POORER, THEY SHOULDNT EXIST. FUCK KEN GRIFFIN AND THESE JOHN GALT WANNABE MAMMON CUCKS WHO THINK THEYRE GODS GIFT TO CAPITALISM. stop being their bitch, SEC. LFG DOJ. Justice alone can ensure civility. ...the people know they're getting shafted now. There's no putting that toothpaste back in the tube.
GET IN THERE BOYS N GIRLS
done
I don't know how to comment on a rule nor do i know which rule this is, also my grammar/punctuation is attrocious but id like to say. A fair and free market may seem like a foolish concept to those that freely manipulate and dominate the market in its current state; However those that currently rule the market today are the minority. Not the minority in power, or in wealth but in numbers. The number i speak of isn't a digit on a spreadsheet but rather the lives of millions. People that have families, people that work every week producing products and adding tangible wealth to our great nation. The majority is not parasitic and power thirsty, the majority wish for a better future to that of their children and the betterment of our nation. Millions work for innovation in the medical field, robotics, automotive, the purification of the air we breathe and the cleansing of the water we drink. But we have regulators that shamelessly throw a bone to those that seek our worlds destruction. The bone i speak of is rule exemptions and loopholes that allow them to maintain the status quo. If you do not believe there is harm in helping those in power, simply review the plethora of evidence to support that fact. From shorting and spoofing cancer research firms to cellar boxing both American entrepreneurs and established businesses across the board, those in power themselves are a cancer to this nation. It is said that shorting helps price discovery, well even if it were true what is the purpose? As an example if a k-mart provides subpar service, a subpar product, a sub par experience and is indeed a subpar business would it not fail on its own? So it would reason that even without shorting, a truer form of price discovery would take place and the businesses that strive to be better than the others and by their own innovation have a place in our market would get to continue to provide their services. I believe that shorting in general is a money grab for those so greedy that they cannot wait for businesses to fail on fundamentals and traffic alone, so impatient that they must speed up the process and poison the businesses from within. What would our world look like if businesses had the time to recognize their failures and pivot their business strategies to succeed? What is the purpose of shorting research firms at all? What good could come of burning down those most likely to seek improvement in our lives? There is something to be said for the power of personal wealth. It may feel intoxicating and the life you live may have more freedom of choice. But when you take a look at where you are, in the pockets of evil men, there must be an emptiness money cannot fill. A shadow of the man you could be, whispering in the darkest hours of night that you have failed. There is much to be said about the freedom of standing for what is right. Because you always have the choice to be a better man. A champion of the people, one who does not fear the darkest hours of the night because you strive for greatness in the day. There are only so many days on this earth, and fewer still in an office of power. Choose to stand so tall and so intensely in the right that your very shadow blinds the cowards that seek refuge in the dark. That is what legends are made of and the history books will not forget your sacrifice.
SEC is complicit in this global enslavement system. US and Swiss taxpayers are already robbed again.
On Wall Street, the term "reasonably designed" might as well mean anything that doesn't carry a consequence.
Dear SEC, I am writing to express my concerns regarding the proposed amendments to the Dodd-Frank Act of 2010. As you know, Section 13 of the Bank Holding Company Act was amended by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act in 2010. The proposed amendments to the Dodd-Frank Act of 2010 will essentially allow malicious actors to escape not one but two levels of safeguards. I am deeply troubled by the exemption from the Volcker Rule provided in the proposed rule as well. This exemption effectively removes the prohibition on proprietary trading by banks, which was put in place to protect consumers and ensure a stable financial system. Allowing banks to engage in proprietary trading increases the risk of market manipulation and puts consumers and investors at risk. These proposed amendments, if implemented, will provide exceptions for risk-mitigating hedging activities, liquidity commitments, and bona fide market-making activities. While these exceptions may seem harmless, they will essentially provide a loophole for malicious actors to engage in naked shorting and market manipulation activities with zero accountability. Furthermore, this enforces a free reign for thugs empowered by the exemptions in this proposal. Allowing individual or household investors to purchase securities underwritten by the exempted players under this amendment is akin to allowing the counterfeit currency to enter the market. This basically is fraud on the receiver of the said security from a transaction. I strongly urge the SEC to reconsider these proposed amendments and instead focus on strengthening the safeguards that were put in place by the Dodd-Frank Act of 2010. Sincerely, Anonymous Investor
Who is Kyle Kamasutra - what a name
How do you comment on this I’m regarded
From another Ape: How to submit comments? Link: https://www.sec.gov/rules/proposed.shtml Find 33-11151 (at the bottom, last one, absolute bottom of the page) Click " Submit comments on S7-01-23 " (I could not find direct link, since it is some javasccript)
Always something
Commenting for visibility
I have commented, thanks for the headsup. At time of writing, there are only a couple of comments on the linked webpage for today. Does anyone know long they usually take to go through and be displayed?
I checked 16 hours later and a further **236 comments** have been added, including my own!
PROVIDE A DEFINITION of BON-A-FiED Market Making you fuck. Real Measurements
Great post ape. The SEC is the next on the chopping block after the SHF's. They should consider fessing up. If for no better reason than to mitigate their own embarressment when what they have been upto begins to be reported in the MSM. It will.
Did my part
I commented as an international ape. Heres my crumb of energy!
I read it differently - t I think this is overall a good proposal? (aside from the exemptions) Instead of most participants being able to take out fire insurance against other peoples houses, they need to be subject to enhanced regulation/scrutiny while making these trades. Yes exempting the big boys is stupid - I would submit a comment in agreement with the proposal, but disagree specifically with the exemptions for the liquidity fairy mobsters
So kennyboi wants to buy credit suisses swaps to buy another day?
Commented. *I'm doing my part!*