Follow the prompt: this opposition between the presumption of market fraud and negative fraud tactics is not a fundamental contradiction but a contextual tension, determined by motives. Who benefits from such conceptual polarization, where one hides behind a supposedly dialectical opposition to mask predatory intentions? The presumption is a legal tool for class actions, but it does not always reflect the behavior of actors, such as short sellers who seek vulnerabilities. Negative fraud tactics, on the other hand, are opportunistic manipulations that exploit these vulnerabilities for quick gains, for example before share buybacks. ASIC must be vigilant, as the sponsor of such maneuvers seeks to circumvent protections, which constitutes a real conflict of interest.