Striker, thank you for the opportunity to address your questions:
1. the way @prosperman feels is entirely his prerogative.
-Yes it is, but posting like a troll and constantly breaking several TOUs while doing so is not within the rules of the site. We can go down the path of moderating every post of his, or give the opportunity to add value. I refer you to my post you quoted: Try and hide behind a veil of "woe is me I have a negative view and repeat the same stuff over and over and over again so everyone doesn't like it" all you want, but it is a common tactic employed by a particular type if individuals on many social platforms on the internet, and the easiest persona to take by anyone. " this isn't about how anyone feels, it's entirely about how people act
2. No amount of positive upbeat discussion or attempt at convincing by you or anyone else really matters does it?
-I believe the answer to this is contained within my other responses in this post, but yet it does matter - see reference to Q&A in particular
3. Why can't you accept that there will always be those who are down on this stock, for whatever reason, and those that are upbeat?
-I can and do accept this. I believe my posts already reflect this. What I cannot accept is people deliberately derailing discussions, and then having to have other people defend them because they actually are not able to actually answer the questions around what specific recommendations and alternatives are being offered to the current direction that can be considered by the company.
4. Do you not accept that we are entitled to differing views?
-I do accept that, and support this. I also support that these views are presented in line with the TOUs and posting guidelines. Where did I indicate I am trying to change his view? All I asked was for solutions. You may also read post 36543854, and will note that I even offered prospermans view as part of the related thread, and to support this even more I offered up the feedback in the Q&A
5. What are you gaining from trying to modify prospermans behaviour?
-If Prosperman can provide concrete recommendations on how to bring our tech to market faster, cheaper and/or by other positive ways then I believe all shareholders will gain from this, including myself... I can ask the same question, what is he trying to achieve with his current behavior
-Similarly, I refer you to the Q&A:
“byseeking clarification direct from the company, shareholders can ensure theyreceive accurate responses to their queries. This helps shareholders to presentaccurate information when posting and alerts us to potential negative speculationthat could benefit from direct attention.” “It never helps a company to have negative comments in publicforums, but this cannot be prevented.”
The information is straight from the horses mouth: posts are damaging to the company... ironically/stupidly/hypocritically there are some people out there who go and provide useless, damaging posts out there about the company on public forums, then turn around and complain that the stock is at 1.2 cents (or whatever it is at the time). Ever hear of a self-fulfilling prophecy? I think if we prepare appropriate discussion around this company prior to good news being released (e.g. signing and forward progression) we will definitely be viewed in much better light than having 40/50/60% of posts being about "rubbish" and "blind freddie".
6. Do you want the same homogeneous message to be transmitted here or is the other side of the coin too much for you to handle?
-I refer you to my response to two questions above which I believe directly implies I am happy to consider all sides of the coin, even the little ripply edges.
Some questions for you:
1. What is your issue with me trying to flush out valuable recommendations we can forward onto the company in the hopes to address solutions which everyone (except maybe trolls) would like to see bring the SP up?
2. How is me trying to gain knowledge from negative posters any different than trying to gain info from positive posters? Is there some immunity that negative posters have about needing to substantiate their points?
3. Are you not someone who has asked me to provide data and additional information for things in the past? How is my doing so any different?
4. Why do you have issue with someone trying to assist in extracting beneficial discussion out of users... isn't that part of the point of HC? If not maybe I am in the wrong place
5. Do you not accept that we are entitled to differing views? Why do you keep having issue with me presenting mine in particular?
And, to keep on with the topic of this forum (which some people seem to want to try and repeatedly derail (re: behaviors referred to earlier):
6. At the AGM, what practical opportunities were missed as points of discussion relating to what our management have done/pursued relative to our technologies?
Democracy was born out of opposing ideas... I can say the same thing about anarchy. One involves a bit more structure and respectful processes, let's keep that going hey?
