MSB Trading - 2020, page-1992

Firstly I'm making observations about regulation, which is an area of interest.

You don't seem to understand that there are elements that must be proved when you raise a legal issue such as defamation. You're conflating what you think is defamation the face of it, with satisfying all the elements to prove it. They're very different things.

There are defences such as reasonable comment. Further I think the individual involved would have to be very thin skinned indeed to care what an individual in a chat site, on a particular stock has to say. Let alone how he expects to quantify how this has professionally damaged him, particularly if he's involved in any way with the issues ASIC currently has with Regal Investments. Regardless, there's an argument that he could be affected by mere association with Regal, should those charges proceed and it would be very hard to separate these issues in terms of damage. You seem to have no idea about any of this.

Secondly, I'm clearly making the observation that the law, as it currently stands, is inadequate. As well as the resources directed into enforcement. This is my point! It's a reasonable opinion to hold. And I clearly showed why. I criticised the fact that when a negative report is issued, there is no legal requirement for disclosure if also a short position has been taken by the writer, unlike in the US. I have not stated that Craig Collie had in fact shorted the stock, at that time. I think there are indications that he has. If you didn't manage to understand all of that it's hardly my problem.

Thirdly, HC has a policy which it uses to manage the broader issues relating to defamation. They certainly don't investigate the truth or otherwise of any statements or determine if elements of the matter are established or even likely to be. It's just a broad brush policy. Clearly just like ASIC, they don't have the resources.

Finally I happen to have a couple of law degrees, including an LLM. And I'm a woman. Yet you say I'm the one making assumptions.
I'm interested in changing the law.

Does that make any sense to you NOW?