"hahahahahaha...it sounds like I upset someone's party, and burst their interlocutor balloon ...hahahaha..I'm sorry shareholders...next time I will be less helpful."
1. As I have noted on many occasions - it is my view that that posts and information from former employees and contractors should be viewed with great caution by all shareholders and potential investors. In my opinion, objective perspective and the ability to be impartial may be greatly compromised as a result of previous relationships.
"I, for one, don't appreciate posts from non holders who have chased this stock for nigh on 6 years who appear at least, from a hidden post, to be trying to cast doubts on a shareholder who is trying to help other shareholders."
2. It matters little what a poster appreciates or does not appreciate. What should matter are the facts. In trying to "help other shareholders", do you still (subconsciously or otherwise) imagine yourself in your former role as a 'contracted' shareholder liaison representative?
3. In your response, what I think that you do not appreciate are other posters highlighting inconsistencies and factual data. It has been my observation that whenever that happens, what follows is an overly emotional, 'shoot the messenger' type response and the facts are largely ignored.
Q. Do you think that it is reasonable to provide a former contractor with information that is not readily available to other shareholders. The most obvious issue is that the information that you provided to this forum is not verifiable or subject to fair scrutiny.
Again, I encourage all posters to worry less about the motivation of a particular post and focus on the accuracy of the information presented.
Also, if you don't like what I post - refrain from responding.
If posts are inaccurate then highlight the errors. It's very simple stuff.
