Truthseeker,
I don't wish to make a major production out of this, nor do I have the time to get deeply into it. However, after reading your just published report on Conolog, which I found very interesting, would not the best means of delivering "the truth" be to simply deliver "the truth" and let it rest on its own merits? Also, is "the truth" important?
I presume you'd answer yes to both of the above.
So why then did you make "the truth" suspect?
Why would you possibly compromise and make suspect "the truth,"--if it truly is "the truth"--by immediately pasting your report on Conolog onto the most notorious of short-seller threads: Anthony @ Equity Investigations, Dear Anthony, on Silicon Investor?
On Friday, March 17, 2000, at 5:53 p.m. (eastern time), you published your report on the Conolog thread:
[NOTE 5:53 p.m.]
Message 13230118
Instantly thereafter, on Friday, March 17, 2000, at 5:56 PM (eastern time)--[NOTE: 5:56 p.m.]--you immediately alerted the shortsellers' prime thread:
Message 13230128
Since when did "the truth" become part and parcel to shorting? I'd seem to me, in a truthful situation, the shorters should have the same fair discovery as the longs who are gonna be hurt by your report? Mr. TruthSeeker, how do you reconcile fair discovery within your version of truth? Or have you spoonfed your allies in the matter?
Frankly, I find any quest for "the truth" an admirable endeavor. However, your means of delivery is both wrongful and repuslive. It makes your report on Conolog as suspect and as questionable as the allegations you contain within your report.
I guess the below article describes why you cozied to the shorties immediately after posting your report on Conolog.
Message 13230215
It would appear, based on your methodology of delivering the Conolog report, that the article referenced above is 100 percent correct, at least relative to the allegation that you're in in bed with the shorters. Thus, is described a motive behind your reporting. "The truth" be known, your work is on the side of the shortsellers, not the "mom and pop" investors.
Man, oh man, oh man, why can't we "mom and pop" types have a fair up and a fair down? Your self-imposed and questionable version of "the truth" stains the very ideal of a fair up and a fair down within the investing community.
In my view, your view of truth should be banished from any reasonable and rational consideration. I hope you understand what I'm writing about and I wish you both the luck and hope necessary that some day you'll discover what the real truth is all about.
PartyTime
PS: Perhaps in the future you should deliver the report to the company, get their response and print both documents. Then the true investors can discover "the truth." |
