You can't be serious?? Do you actually read what you post and/or understand what other posters are writing??
Quote from you: "In defense of Raks, it was hardly a personalised, antagonistic swipe...and all arguments were started by low-content posters, who have a track record for antagonising the CVi threads."
I was the person that expressed a different point of view. I was not arguing, I was merely making a statement of opinion from my point of view. And now I am bandied with the tainted brush of "a low content poster with a track record for antagonising the CVI threads."
T4P, this is RIDICULOUS. If you can't understand (and clearly you can't) what I was saying and why I was saying it, then perhaps you are the one that needs to learn how to disseminate information and analyse what's written.
Would it have been better if I had joined in with Raks and claimed all the sellers from yesterday are dweebs as they could have sold today for 20% more?? Regardless of whether Raks was making a statement in jest (and I know he was), it would be hurtful to those that did sell. One thing people don't need is to have salt rubbed in their wounds by being called names for trying to do what they thought was right.
Can you please point me to a post where I have antagonised the CVI threads?? This is my challenge to you. Bring up a post where I have antagonised the CVI threads with my low content posting.
If you can, I will discuss it depending on what was written. If you can't, I expect an apology for your wild accusations and incorrect assumptions.
Why would I antagonise a thread of a stock that I am holding myself??
Waiting in aniticpation......
Cheers
CVI Price at posting:
0.0¢ Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held
