re: attn. all posters /// m287j (mj)
MJ, I have posted for quite some time on several sites and as far as "ramping" is concerned, they dealt with it without bringing ASIC into it. The case of BBM is a good example.
You changed that equation. I note that you are a very new poster (13/8/2003); you noted your occupation as "Watchdog" with your favourite link: asic.gov.au
I can't talk for the others but will discuss aspects as outlined in your posts: 1. Post 34302: "Other complaints in recent times have been made about Alan Patridge & Gominer to name a few. Please continue to report all such issues you have to ASIC and and other bodies like ourselves".
Comment: Apparently your information about Alan Partridge was incorrect but you used it in "conversations".
You want people to complain to ASIC and "other bodies like ourselves".
Comment: And it is here where problems arise. I shall tolerate a Moderator but I won't allow any organized approach by people as yourselves to stand over posters.
I was involved in such a case a couple of days ago when "Test"-the other "watchdog" came up to me and said "that Alpha was right and that I was the most dangerous ramper on HC".
I didn't know him and he ignored basic courtesy. A very crass and stupid approach. Subsequently, he made a very positive comment on one of his stocks.
And that will happen if we allow people like you to become organized and sent "tales" to ASIC.
Taking it a step further, we would lose a lot of posters due to undue interference and in my opinion reckless or stupid handling of cases as I read in your posts.
It is worse once personalities rule the roost. What have you got against Alan Partridge?
2 Posters may work hard but in your case you could be a ready made prominent personality by following the course you took: There are several examples which in my opinion indicate this:
2.1 The overbearing use of Cap locks in your first few posts till you were warned off.
2.2 Post 34302: "Examples of this include several postings by 'bbm'. (This will actually be an easy prosecution as the individual concerned has admitted through this website that the information they portrayed was incorrect)".
Comment: No, it won't be an easy prosecution. Unlike you, he has already shown enough contrition. ASIC has other matters to think about.
2.3 Post 34320: "I do not work for ASIC directly".
Comment: This is a dangerous but perhaps impressive statement in your mind. It sounds better than just saying that you are an informer.
However, a paid informer also falls within that classification and this needs to be certified upon an approach to ASIC.
2.4 Post 34460: There is no need to threaten me with ASIC, hilarious as it would be. (Comment: I'll be the judge of that).
2.5 Post 34320; "I am not the only one in here, you could surprise yourself you know, several ASIC personnel could be members of the forum as well. Interesting huh". (Comment: tries to impress others; ASIC has more important things on their mind).
2.6: Post 34460: " If everyone just follows the rules and don't take things personally then everyone will be happy". (Comment: talks down to posters).
Also: "Folks we have got a little out of hand on this post have we not". (Comment:as before). Also: "Any person offended by utilising their names, apologies, but as I said those names have popped up in conversations". (Comment: Careless and reckless, you should have extended personal apologies).
Summary: I believe that you are not the right person to give a fair, responsible and balanced view on ramping/downramping and your confusing statements already have shown that. Hence you won't be an asset to ASIC.
At the same time your position is not an official one and therefore posters can treat you as they see fit.
