There's a rational reason for a holder to post...to spread positive information about the company's prospects and support the share price. Self-interested, transparent, logical.
The difference is, there's no rational reason for a non-holder to continually post detailed negative analyses on the basis that they claim to do so (that is, to warn unsuspecting strangers on the internet off of a dud company, to save them from potential future losses). That's not self-interested, that's not transparent, that's not logical.
The logical reason why a non-holder would post negative content would be to sow FUD in order to suppress the share price, either for political reasons (BBF) or for financial reasons (get a cheap buy-in).
So, non-holders who continually post lengthy, detailed warnings to strangers on the internet, warning them off a company they don't hold are either (a) saintly altruists with far too much time on their hands and a peculiar obsession with this particular "dud" company (among thousands of others) or (b) logical people with ulterior political or financial motives. I go with (b) almost all of the time, but it's up to everyone to make their own informed guess.
VMS Price at posting:
2.2¢ Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held
A personalised tool to help users track selected stocks. Delivering real-time notifications on price updates, announcements, and performance stats on each to help make informed investment decisions.
(20min delay)