".... these folks have attempted to establish themselves as some sort of "authority" on the stock game here within the confines of a very small piece of cyber real estate called SI."
This quote goes to the heart of the reason why I post on this thread. John Curtis, in the context of his mostly logic-free, verbose, frequently repetitious posts, points to people he identifies as sellers of VLNC stock. W/o digressing further into self-evident truths about curtis' posts, this statement stood out because, in it, Curtis could not be more correct in word and wrong in spirit, without curtis apparently understanding why.
If there were one word in the sentence that draws attention, it is "authority." It is undeniable that there are people on this thread who feign and manipulate to suggest they are an authority on VLNC. How do they do it? How does anyone seek to be considered an authority on a subject? The answer is clear: they profess special knowledge and/or experience and/or information. They suggest that they "know" something through means that you, the reader, do not or cannot know. They will suggest it is something that you could know but they would never allow you to confirm it. Ask yourself why they would spend so much time trying to influence a conclusion but would not share the source of the information. Ask yourself why you might be satisfied in merely the conclusion and not independent confirmation of the source after watching their projections fail so many times.
Now, when I read this thread, I saw and continue to see, in an almost exclusive circumstance, people such as mooter775, fred kellett, and several others whose posts repeatedly "stand out" for ignominious reasons.
This group uniformly, almost exclusively, posts to allege that they "know" VLNC is "about to" (substitute "on the cusp of," "imminently," "by next [insert week, month, or any short, finite period of time here]" do something material that will drive the stock price up to stratospheric, unprecedented levels. They suggest that they "know" by virtue of unidentified sources or other information that is not readily and publically available. They are all characterized by emotional, reactive, dogmatic, highly intolerant personalities. They react to all questions and opinions that dissent with their "information" with personal attacks or other tactics to divert and deflect attention to their unsupported allegations. Frequently the attacks devolve to purely personal attacks.
Now, it is these "folks" who profess an authority on VLNC by suggesting inside or otherwise special sources of information. It is these "personalities" who do not hesitate to ignore, explain away, or even disparage information in 10Qs and 10Ks if it conflicts with their "knowledge," as it almost universally does.
It is these "folks" who drew my attention to this thread. The ones who, long before 6/29/98, were making outrageous, unsupported, hyperbolic projections and predictions based on express or implied inside or otherwise special information. And it was their hyperbolic projections that consistently, repeatedly failed to come to pass. "They" are mooter775, fmk, fred kellett, paul klemencic, william sharp and some others whose thread personalities are easily identified by the descriptions in this post. (For the record, it is clear to me that people like pallisard, yoest, johnson, and eli do not fall into this category but rather are the ones who are most vocal in being victim to manipulation.)
As readily as this point can be verified, another is equally as verifiable: the posts that draw these people's ire, that question statements purported to be based on "special" authority, that serve as "minority dissent," are almost always based on verifiable, public information. The conclusions, likewise, are almost always explained in a logical framework.
As much as I regret responding to off-topic posts and lobbing back personal attacks, I enjoy holding the self-anointed authorities accountable. |
