j rector,
>>>>>>>you wrote,"I respectfully disagree with you, Steve. Its a free
country, and people have a right to post anything they
want (within the guidelines set up by SI)--you can, if
you wish to, take issue w/pat's posts. However, I believe that
her contributions to this thread are alot more important that
yours--or mine--because she does have close contacts w/AMTX. It
is not her resposibility to report carefully and conservatively,
its up to you, I and the other people on this thread to ----."
I respectfully disagree with you and support Steve caution.
You view Pat's post 'alot more important than yours---or mine--because she has close contacts with AMTX.' This,if true?, is precisely the reason Steve is trying to convey and holding Pat's to higher standards than the average poster. If Pat does have close contacts at AMTX, does Pat's claims directly or indirectly,on this thread, be viewed as possible non-public Insiders information? Is it possible there is breach of securities laws? If AMTX management is involved dissipating info. via Pat only and this thread, are they breaking the law as well?
I believe Steve and few others are absolutely right to raise issues with some of the 'close contacts' assumption/speculations.
Badshah. |
