# ASF and ASIC Interim Policy Statement 162



## Joe Blow (27 October 2005)

Hi Everyone!

I have poured over the ASIC guidelines regarding internet disccusion sites (specifically ASIC Interim Policy Statement 162) and I would like to outline how I think they pertain to the operation of ASF. The ASIC guidelines have clearly been formulated to ensure that everyone is informed about the inherent risks in acting on information presented in posts on sites such as ASF. I am sure we can all agree that this is a good thing.

It also outlines the responsibilities of posters and those contributing content to internet discussion sites. It emphasizes that posters must ensure that the information presented in their posts is accurate and true to the best of their knowledge and that they don't deliberately set out to deceive or mislead others. Again, I think that is fair enough.

ASIC's explanation of its internet discussion site policy:


> [IPS 162.9] Our policy is a balance between three public policy
> concerns:
> (a) the value in people being able to communicate freely with one
> another;
> ...




As a final word, all I can really suggest is to simply be responsible about what you post in a public forum such as ASF. But I think that goes without saying and is simple common sense. I don't think there is any reason to be overly worried about these particular regulations as they are there simply to ensure that people reading posts are informed of the risks and those posting are aware of their responsibilities. Personally, I think we qualify as one of the most informed and responsible stockmarket forums around.    If you are still concerned, I would simply add an appropriate disclaimer to your signature to make it clear that none of your posts constitute financial advice and that the content of your posts are true and accurate to the best of your knowledge. 

The following information will be permanently added to the Aussie Stock Forums Rules that everyone agrees to at registration, the ASF posting guidelines and the Code of Conduct.



> *POSITION OF AUSSIE STOCK FORUMS*
> 
> Aussie Stock Forums complies with ASIC Interim Policy Statement 162 regarding Internet Discussion Sites.
> 
> ...




You can find of full text of ASIC interim policy statement 162 here: http://www.asic.gov.au/asic/asic.nsf/lkuppdf/ASIC+PDFW?opendocument&key=ps162_pdf

Please feel free to discuss the issue in this thread.


----------



## brerwallabi (27 October 2005)

Thanks Joe for clarifying all regarding this site. I think you do a great job of policing yourself, there is very little unconscionable behaviour on this site  compared to the consistent ramping of HC and SC. I hope all who post the quality information and those who post their experiences and knowledge to this site continue to post.


----------



## Joe Blow (27 October 2005)

Thanks Brer.

I have added the following to the "Responsibilities of Posters' section:



> It is not permitted for Aussie Stock Forums members to ask for specific buy, sell or hold recommendations on particular stocks, as a response to a request of this nature may be considered the provision of financial advice.




I would like to stress that this refers solely to those asking for specific buy, sell or hold recommendations and not requests for general thoughts or comments about a particular stock.


----------



## Julia (27 October 2005)

Thanks Joe.

As you say, all common sense, and it's good to have clarification of details.

I'd like to add my appreciation to that offered by other members for the very fair way you run ASF.  You seem able to accommodate all our different personalities and styles and only intervene in a discussion when clearly the appropriate limits for  the civilised expressions of view have been exceeded.

I've no idea why the above sentence came out sounding so pompous - didn't mean it to be at all.  Hope my meaning is clear:  i.e. you done good, Joe.

Regards
Julia


----------



## ob1kenobi (29 October 2005)

Joe, thanks for the hard work behind the scenes on that one. Many of us already use disclaimers and I think that your suggestion on that is wise. It may appropriate to have the statement "ASF complies with ASIC Interim Policy Statement 162. For further details click here!" at the top of the page. Just a small suggestion. Again thanks!


----------



## Joe Blow (29 October 2005)

Julia said:
			
		

> I'd like to add my appreciation to that offered by other members for the very fair way you run ASF. You seem able to accommodate all our different personalities and styles and only intervene in a discussion when clearly the appropriate limits for the civilised expressions of view have been exceeded.




Julia, I am humbled by your kind words. The knowledge that people find ASF an enjoyable place to visit and interact with others gives me a great feeling of satisfaction.  It is, after all, one of the reasons I started this site in the first place. I think it's a wonderful thing to see so many people from such different walks of life coming together to share information, knowledge and points of view in such a friendly, informal atmosphere.



			
				ob1kenobi said:
			
		

> It may appropriate to have the statement "ASF complies with ASIC Interim Policy Statement 162. For further details click here!" at the top of the page. Just a small suggestion. Again thanks!




Thanks for your suggestion ob1. I may look into incorporating the ASIC PS 162 information into the site in this or a similar way.


----------



## Smurf1976 (29 October 2005)

Joe Blow said:
			
		

> I may look into incorporating the ASIC PS 162 information into the site in this or a similar way.



Please don't do it like HC does where you have to agree to the terms and conditions every time you read another thread. Very annoying although on the positive side it does mean that ASF is now the only stocks forum I visit.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (31 October 2005)

Hi Joe,

Thanks for the information, it is much appreciated.

As Smurph said "don't do it like HotCopper." 
Snake


----------



## Aussiejeff (29 October 2007)

Hi Joe.

According to an article in the Money section of news.com.au this morning, Commsec is going to close down it's online stock chat forums. At the same time, the article also announced ASIC is going to do a 12-18 months review of the guidelines for all online stock forums - and that would include Aussie Stock Forums as well - presumably looking to tighten the regulations (and dare I say, PENALTIES) with regard to anyone providing unsolicited and/or un-professional stock advice via online stock forums.

If this is so, in the interests of this forum never falling foul of any serious consideration of closure, it might be pertinent to hammer home to us all (and especially have it notified prominently on the home page for "newbies" joining up) that any ramping of stocks - either up OR down - or any comments about a stock or stocks that could be construed as "offering financial advice" is not permitted and will result in an immediate ban.

This is looking serious now - HotCopper and some other chat forums might be forced to close by the look of it, so I guess we all need to tread VERY carefully when it comes to commenting about particular stocks! 

Regards,

AJ


----------



## Joe Blow (1 November 2007)

Aussiejeff said:


> Hi Joe.
> 
> According to an article in the Money section of news.com.au this morning, Commsec is going to close down it's online stock chat forums. At the same time, the article also announced ASIC is going to do a 12-18 months review of the guidelines for all online stock forums - and that would include Aussie Stock Forums as well - presumably looking to tighten the regulations (and dare I say, PENALTIES) with regard to anyone providing unsolicited and/or un-professional stock advice via online stock forums.
> 
> ...




Hi AJ,

Thanks for your post. I agree with you 100%.

ASF will continue with its hardline stance against ramping and will look at tightening things even further. Members who consistently prove to be a problem will have their posting privileges revoked.

I am currently overseas and will be doing a comprehensive review of ASF's policies on ramping upon my return.

It has always been my view that ramping is the greatest threat that faces stock forums and the mods and I have always done our best to stamp it out on ASF. If we need to get tougher then that's exactly what we will do. I urge all ASF members to report posts that they consider to be ramps/downramps. As much as the mods and I would like to review every post, it just isn't possible. We need the assistance of the ASF community to help us keep on top of it.

I will not allow ASF to become a haven for rampers. Ramping irritates me and I have absolutely no problem with suspending the membership of those who wish to do it here.


----------



## Spineli (6 November 2007)

Dear all,

This Policy statement targeting online stock forums is just a small part of a much wider plan to regulate online blogs, forums of all sorts, social network sites etc...a seemingly impossible task...

In terms of its practical effect, I think it will dissuade a lot of people from making posts for fear of breaching a guideline or rule. 

What is okay to post and what is not in a broader sense? 

If giving an opinion of the direction of a stock, would that be considered financial advice? 

And in any case, I have noticed some people here use disclaimer's at the bottom of each of their posts. Is that considered to be a sufficient waiver of providing financial advice? 

Joe, you said above that "If you are still concerned, I would simply add an appropriate disclaimer to your signature to make it clear that none of your posts constitute financial advice and that the content of your posts are true and accurate to the best of your knowledge"

If such a disclaimer is considered sufficient to waive providing financial advice...then would it be wise to add this to "*ALL MEMBERS"* profiles/posts...and resolve any concerns anyone posting on ASF would have about the implications of this policy statement. 

Here's to another idea if the above does not work.

Joe, you mention above that moderators and administrators do their best to keep ASF forums as compliant as possible (or words to that effect).

Given the membership size of this forum and the monumentous task of reviewing every post...would "*self-policing*" not be the ultimate remedy? 

At the moment, members are not able to edit/delete their posts. Perhaps if this functionality is added...then concerned individual posters could self-assess their posts to further assist in attaining the overriding goal of maintaining a forum that is as compliant as possible with the Policy Statement that is being discussed here.

To summarise here are the main issues addressed above...
1) What is okay to post and what is not?
2) Is providing an 'opinion' as to the direction of a stock considered to be 'financial advice'?
3) The use of disclaimer's, their effect and possible inclusion in the posts of ALL MEMBERS?
4) Self-policing - adding the edit/delete functionality


----------



## Joe Blow (7 November 2007)

Spineli said:


> Dear all,
> 
> This Policy statement targeting online stock forums is just a small part of a much wider plan to regulate online blogs, forums of all sorts, social network sites etc...a seemingly impossible task...
> 
> ...




Hi Spineli,

Thank you for your thoughts. You address some interesting points. Let me respond to them one by one.

1) What is okay to post and what is not?

In stock threads it is okay to post news, general information and your own analysis. All analysis must be supported by known facts or based on forecasts made by the company or reasonable extrapolation based on known facts (e.g. potential mineral resources based on drilling etc)

It is not okay to post buy or sell recommendations on stocks. It is not permitted to advise people in any way on how to invest their funds. The purpose of Aussie Stock Forums is to provide a place where people can discuss stocks and stock market related concepts and share their knowledge to help others become better informed.

2) Is providing an 'opinion' as to the direction of a stock considered to be 'financial advice'?

No. However, please note that we do not allow people just to guess the direction of a stock without providing some analysis to back up their position. All views on a stock, both positive and negative, must be supported by some detailed reasoning. This gives others something to respond to and results in a more robust discussion. Providing a positive or negative view on a stock without providing any details (or deliberately misleading/incorrect details) is known as ramping/down ramping. We take a hard line against these sort of posts. 

3) The use of disclaimer's, their effect and possible inclusion in the posts of ALL MEMBERS?

There is a general disclaimer at the bottom of each page of ASF. There is also a notice below the post icons as people compose their posts. We also have an announcement regarding ASF's Posting Guidelines at the top of each individual forum. If however, ASIC decides there is a need for a disclaimer at the bottom of each post then I am quite happy to implement this.

4) Self-policing - adding the edit/delete functionality

There is a 20 minute time limit on the editing of posts because I do not want people misrepresenting themselves or their positions by altering their posts later to erase previously held views. I want people to give a lot of thought to posting and not to post unless they are sure of what they wish to say. A time limit means that people can't come back later, change their posts and deny what they had said previously. People need to stand by their positions (and their posts in general) and if they wish to publically change them - for whatever reason - that they do so in another post. 

I strongly urge those posting to proofread their posts carefully and to take advantage of the 20 minute window of opportunity to edit their posts. Ensure that your posts accurately represent your position/views. Please understand that your posts are a permanent record of your conduct on this site and you should give very careful consideration to what you post.

Hope this adequately answers your questions.


----------

