legal action tobagocrack, page-19

Hi all,

Just a brief drop in while I wait for SLA's fate to be decided by the market.

For once, I have to side with SLA. Negative comments, discussion of rumours, accidental errors and even blatant hatred of a company are fine. Stating rumour as fact and blatant lying, however, are not. Although TJ did make me laugh at times he did well and truly cross the line.

In my opinion both sides of the argument need to lift their game. For example, Epi, it is hardly fair for you to run around and criticise TJ when you continually claim Relenza to be defective. Granted, Relenza doesn't work very well, but it does work. BTA even has actual peered reviewed freely available papers in well respected journals to prove that it works.

Normally, I would have agreed with other posters that simply pulling down TJ's posts would have been enough, both from the point of view that TJ's banning is what was warranted and from the point that SLA's management really shouldn't be wasting time worrying about what was said on an obscure chat site. Since nearly all of SLA's shareholders (other than Solamind and the other Russians) are "mums and dads" it my be worth chasing him down. Mums and dads are much more likely to be influenced by stuff on HC than institutions.

Cheers and see you in December,

Bill