Mr. Davis,
I wish to express to you my support in both your desire to express your opinions as you have in reference to the Toronto Stock Exchange, and, in addition, your decision to, as you put it, "to turn out the lights".
I understand, more than you can imagine both of your decision as I have myself face not the same, but certainly similar set of choices.
Having said the above, they say that there is always more than one way to skin a cat.
I am not familiar with all of the details, however I can not imagine that whatever you have said, particularly if such statements are based on facts, as it appears it is the case, that the TSE would consider these statements to be "publishing defamatory material".
Facts are facts, either they are proven or not.
If an organization such as the TSE has a "problem" with your statements, or SI posts. all they have to do is disprove you with facts. However, it seems to me that their pathetic attempt to "silence" you with the threat of legal action, discredits their case and it certainly makes them appear to be a modern day Neanderthal by the exercise of the legal mallet.
The bureaucrat, whether he/she is funded by a private or a public source, (the source frankly is irrelevant), possesses a mentality of destruction. Indeed, its sole function is to obstruct objective thought, as it is designed to present obstacles to whatever constructive idea may be in its path. One can say that it is like a mindless [hence stupid] terminator, designed to protect the interest of their creator, or funding source.
You Mr. Davis have made an intelligent choice, as one, must at all times "pick one's battles".
I am not an attorney, nor I am familiar with details in reference to this issue, of Canadian Law, as it may be applicable. From a practical and ethical point of view, I fail to see how the TSE position could be defensible, all they have to do is prove you wrong, surely they must understand that you are entitled to your opinion, and if such opinion is backed up by true facts, how would that be considered "defamatory material".
I would say that freedom of speech is the issue here.
While the freedom of speech is guaranteed by the first amendment to the US Constitution, one must be certain that such law is the applicable law. The question is: Is the first amendment applicable in this case?
The confines of Cyberspace, in regards to the new [still in formation] Cyberlaw, are dangerous places, further, the situation becomes somehow more complicated as the matter of American or Canadian jurisdiction is unresolved.
These differences are crucial, since the first amendment, part of the bill of rights, may only be applicable to events that take place under US jurisdiction. Further, one must understand that the bill of rights is a document that it is non-existent in any other country of this planet. This makes, and historically has made a BIG difference.
There are interests far larger than those of Mr. Davis, that could be watching this and other related issues, that at a given point could throw their support one way or the other.
Who would wish to be the "test case" to serve as "precedent" for new law?
Such unknowns, represent an increased level of risk, that most of us, as investors in the SI Universe, should be somehow familiar in considering such risks. However, it is clearly evident, that many are not. Such risk, placed against any possible reward will determine the objectivity and validation to take on a fight against a bureaucratic monster.... single handedly.
I am a supporter of free speech without question, at the same time I must accept the reality of the world in which we live in, it would be unfair to ask you Mr. Davis to be the sole individual to bear most [if not all] the risk of taking on the eight headed monster that the TSE represents.
However, I believe that like any other product or service, the TSE is and will be subject to the invisible hand of the free markets.
Moreover, here is where I believe that "we the people" can make a difference.
The world is fast becoming a smaller place. Not too long ago, the events as the one we are discussing here would be impossible to learn about in a relatively easy way, if it were not for the Internet that enables us, individuals to access such information and further enable us to express our opinions. To exchange our ideas.
We can be "mad as hell" all we want and bitch and moan likewise, but the bottom line is what are we going to do about it.
If the TSE, (or any other exchange for that matter), is as evil as they seem to be, [and please understand, I am not siding with them at all], then what we need to do is find out what our real, and viable options/choices are.
1. Do we fight them? If so, in what fashion. Do we form an independent 'corporation', in order to somehow limit our personal liability, or do we [as individuals] take on the TSE and their legal threats? Is it cost effective? What precisely are our goals?
2. Do we do nothing about it?
3. Do we formally protest?
4. If applicable, is it worth consulting with the ACLU?
5. Or do we simply 'vote' with our wallets/business?
I believe that prior to executing a reaction without thought or basic analysis would not be advisable...
Here are some sites to do a little... shall we say, soul searching?
aclu.org
w3.trib.com
It seems to me that most of the investing public does so for the purpose of making money... If such is the case, we must find out what is the best environment to do so.
They say all roads eventually "lead to Rome"... our job is to find the most convenient way to "Rome".
That means an analysis not only of the companies, strategies, and forms whereby our invested dollars and available time is best placed.
In addition, we must analyze the forum/exchange where our investing takes place.
It seems to me that with today's technologies and general thrust of the investment world, that we could consider investing practically anywhere in the world. This means options and alternatives that offer our best possible scenario in order to obtain the ultimate goal of making money.
If the Toronto Stock Exchange proves to be inefficient, unfair in their practices, indeed in allowing fraud to take place and leaving the individual investor, who I may add it is a very important component of what makes a market possible to exists, totally unprotected from the above eventualities, then the last place I would want to be is at the Toronto Stock Exchange.
I do not mean to sound simplistic, but if I have a number of options to choose from, where my sole objective is to invest in order to make money, why would I want to place my money in a place where the regulator, or moderator of such market is indeed inefficient? Therefore, increasing [unnecessarily], my risk.
Particularly in the face of new circumstances that make such participation even more difficult to support, namely:
1. Scandals such as BREX (and others).
2. Being non-compliant with the Y2K issue.
3. Continuos interruptions of the basic operation due to 'high volume'
4. Arrogance, [and inefficiency] by the operators of such exchange.
That alone, in my eyes makes a case, for staying as far away as I can from such place. Certainly as an investor, and I would hope as a company issuing stock.
On top of that, we have the risk that the companies listed in such exchange represent.
Where I come from, we have an expression that says:
"Make sure that the gravy is not more expensive than the meatballs"
Translating, this means that while there is an inherent risk in the act of investing, why make it riskier, by executing such act in a place where the PLACE itself represents a HIGHER risk than the act of investment itself....
I am of the opinion that as we "globalize" our economies, there will be serious consolidations that are prompted by an efficient market.
It is not a matter whether it will happen or not, it is already happening, and there is nothing that the bureaucrats can do to alter such. Their choice is to either become efficient and offer the investing public a better exchange, or become extinct.
While it is debatable the length of time that it will take in order for this evolution to take place, it is already happening, particularly as increasingly, people become more educated and aware of their choices. "We the people" are responsible to protect our own interest, and that means educating ourselves as to what our choices and alternatives are.
There are already brokerage houses that are offering the means to by-pass market makers, and indeed allow the investing public to become a real "participant" in the market, rather than allow the market makers and specialists be "our representatives".
As an example, I offer the following:
Firms such as MB Trading, in which offer direct placing of one's orders between bid and ask:
Subject 19037
Execution systems such as SOES (and others, that slowly are being made available to the retail investing public)
Subject 5250
In my opinion this is only the beginning, I understand that Canadian Options may not be offered as of yet, but that may change, particularly if there were to be a demand for them, triggered by the very events we are discussing here.
The choices in the future will be clear, either these bureaucrats become more aware of the needs of the investing public, (armed with new capabilities, thanks to technology), or they will become extinct.
In the mean time, I want to bring to your attention a few choice thoughts from Henry Louis Mencken (1880 - 1956), that in a more eloquent manner express my own feelings, and quite possibly your own, Mr. Davis.
The funny thing is that Mr. Mencken passed away a few years ago, yet his thoughts are as if they were meant for the monsters that threaten us today....
Here are a few:
"The most dangerous man, to any government, is the man who is able to think things out for himself, without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost invariably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane and intolerable, and so, if he is romantic, he tries to change it. And if he is not romantic personally, he is apt to spread discontent among those who are."
*************
"[Government] is apprehended, not as a committee of citizens chosen to carry on the communal business of the whole population, but as a separate and autonomous corporation, mainly devoted to exploiting the population for the benefit of its own members. .... When a private citizen is robbed, a worthy man is deprived of the fruits of his industry and thrift; when the government is robbed, the worst that happens is that certain rogues and loafers have less money to play with than they had before."
*****************
"An idealist is one who, on noticing that a rose smells better than a cabbage, concludes that it will also make better soup."
*****************
"The cynics are right nine times out of ten."
-------------------------------------------------
In closing Mr. Davis, I remind you that I am not an attorney and I am not giving you any advice whatsoever, I am merely expressing my opinion about, and support for your actions, I wish you the best of luck, and I hope that you can find the right approach so as to not be silenced, yet at the same time you are not placed in a position of unnecessary and unreasonable risk that jeopardize your best interest.
Best regards.
Z. |
