Hello Wolff,
I'm at a loss ... here it is that we have finally been making some progress ... with you starting to provide some information (however unrelated) and now you turn once again into your petty name calling.
I seem to see a very clear pattern here ... you post historical information, repetitive information, and information that is 10% fact and 90% useless. When I attempt to pursue this further, you refuse and turn to name calling and general inability to relate. You constantly show signs of just not understanding the technology and the industry that you claim to know so much about.
What's the matter, is the subject and reality of the topic just too much for you?
I would suggest that you (and all readers of this thread!) see if you fit the profile:
anatomyofbasher.netfirms.com
I'm seeing that you seem to fit Lesson #1, #2, #3, and #4 ... at a minimum. However, it appears that you need to closely read the guide to good bashing. You seem to suck pretty bad at understanding some of the "rules" of how to be good at this. Specifically, you have completely missed on #3, #4, #7, #10, #19 ... and heck, many others.
> Lemon, your continued lack of honesty is quite
> disappointing and I would appreciate it if you spare
> addressing me messages with continual abundance
> half-truths and misleading interpretations.
Hmmm ... how cute. I'm trying to figure out if you actually wrote this all by yourself ... or if you needed to get help.
I'd love for you to specifically address these new claims that you have made. Please ... provide the details and let's discuss them. You indicate that there are:
1) lack of honesty - please be specific ... I have addressed your numbered issues.
2) half-truths - please, let's discuss this ...
3) misleading interpretations - again, let's talk about this.
You see, this is what SI is all about. The continuous discussion and exchange of information ...
> That you choose to mislead as a response to my posts
> gives me concern.
Wow ... more than *your* posts intended to mislead? Give me a break. I have to admit that it is just too much fun to post to someone who so obviously is out of their league. Please, if you're going to attempt to stay in this one, you're going to need to do more reading ...
> By all means post on Silicon Investor, but your clear
> purpose of deception through your
> fantasy-make-believe-technical representations, is an
> embarrassment.
Yes ... I do continue to post on SI ... and I will continue to post, related to the various industries that I am involved in. I can understand how these posts are proving to be very embarrassing to you. Not only do they fully expose your foolish attempts to "bash" this stock, they indicate just how bad you are at it.
You can continue to turn these into attacks against me, however I'm not interested and don't care. I'd like to discuss technology with you, and anyone else interested in doing so. You just continue to demonstrate that when you are exposed for what you are, you are unable to continue with a rational technical discussion.
> Though you fane an attempt to address the points I raise,
> in actuality all you do is use the minutia to attempt to
> negate the mass of facts that you cannot reject. You are
> an artist of Posting a self-serving weaving of words of
> falsehood and general obfuscation to the important
> points.
Wow ... now who wrote *that* paragraph for you? This is really starting to become very fun. Not only are you unable to respond to the technical discussion, you now have others writing insult-attempts for you! Amazing ... I would have never thought that you were *this* inept.
I'm sorry that you seem to be so out of touch with technology, while also being unable to even "bash" on your own. I can now understand why you are such a bitter and angry person. I had not realized how "unskilled" you actually are ...
> Lemon, you present nothing of substance other than what
> you feel is true. What is clear is that your responses is
> that your understanding of technology and your
> understanding of the XYBR business model have no
> relationship together.
So let me see ... I have presented to you a whole series of arguments and historical examples, and additional expertise in this area. I have provided links, and even asked you to address specific issues. I have tried to ask about areas in your analysis that need more explanation ... and you choose to pass on all these opportunities to simply make general statements like "you present nothing of substance other than what you feel is true" ... hmmm ... maybe you need to re-read some of the posts. And while you are at it, you ought to broaden your selective research methods. It appears that you have left out a lot of information.
> There is absolutely no evidence that the industry is
> moving towards a CORE concept.
So as I sit here at a laptop with a docking station, you feel that way, huh?
And I guess that there were big indications that the industry was moving towards the Internet and the browser concept? I know ... you non-technical people just can't understand the "inventors" process ...
> Without the industry XYBR will fail at this attempt.
Without the industry doing what?
> The premise that these enclosures, which are the form
> factor of laptops and cellphone and PDAs, will exist is
> supported by no evidence or acknowledgement of
> manufactures. Without this, the concept is dead.
Please ... provide more detail of this statement. The concept is in wide usage today ... almost every laptop vendor provides this today. So all sorts of vendors support exists.
> Other than your own fantasy assessment, show me a
> substantial statement that industry is moving towards a
> CORE goal. The CORE is a solution that is looking for a
> problem that the industry does not see. The CORE is D- or
> F work by any fair grading system. Can you show that
> industry is even considering a CORE? NO!
So first, I would be glad to send you a series of links for every docking station that is on the market. This is a prime example of the "core" concept today ... a natural step of evolution for laptops.
Second, I still think it is so amusing that you insist on being such a "follower" ... someone who can't think beyond what they read. So if it doesn't already exist, then it will never be? I'm sorry to tell you now, that you will fail to ever recognize the next revolutions as they occur.
As I started to use the Internet in 1993/1994 it was apparent to me where the Internet was going ... but there was no "industry consideration" of this fact. Where were you with your investment brilliance?
> You have been a proponent of XYBR but you do not address
> the stock price, or the very questionable business model
> of XYBR that has not turned a profit in the many many
> years of XYBR operation.
I actually have ... but of course it's not your intention to listen. I've answered every question that you have asked, and if there are specific issues that you have with the answers, then let's discuss them here, openly, in this wonderful public forum that has been provided for that exact purpose ...
But no ... that's not what you really want is it?
> Lemon, until you are ready to post with honesty and
> candor (something I don?t see you capable of),
Oops ... slipping on the "bashing" rules again ... and making those parents really proud of you ...
> as opposed to these dim and intentionally manipulative
> posts,
... wow ... slipping more ... and the parents and children must be *really* proud of you now ...
> I would be appreciate it if you do not post to me.
... well now, are you asking me for something? You are asking *me* for something?
I'm sorry, but I just can't agree. You see, I have this thing about the areas of technology that I am involved with. I want to fully explore all of the possibilities and potential that the industry has to offer. And when I see people showing up that want to mislead and misdirect with misinformation, well, then I just *have* to start asking questions. What I saw was that the more that I threw out scenarios, and information, along with questions for more detail, the arguments of these people would breakdown ... and they usually would start to try and divert the discussion in the direction of personal attacks and avoiding answering the questions that I have asked. Just like what you are doing ...
I've learned over the last few years that there are a lot of "arm chair quarterbacks" that will sit back and *talk*, but don't actually understand what they are talking about first hand. And first hand is the only way to really live ...
> You need to be able to connect what is likely to occur
> together with the strongest technology to put together a
> realistic roadmap of the future.
... and learn from the past. You see, there is this simple little saying that has so much truth about "Those who don't learn from the past are doomed to repeat it!" ... I'm sorry that I don't know the author.
And so I do what you suggest, but combine that with expertise gained over time, and other historical perspective ... and I live it.
> The likeliness drop of XYBR stock from the high 20's to 8
> dollars something any informed investor was going to
> recoginize.
And so I'm glad that you made a ton of money shorting it all the way down. You seem to be claiming that you fully recognized this ...
Oh yes ... and I'm sure that it was completely unrelated to the Nasdaq ... right? You are so funny ... I have to say that each post I really start to like you more and more. I look forward to your next reply!
> I think you should be ashamed to have portraying the
> health of XYBR stock and products.
Please ... now I don't want to be misquoted here. Are you suggesting that I have at all portrayed the "health" of XYBR stock and products?
Now you are stepping into the area of blatant lies. Can you please provide the post where I have done this? I'm guessing that you are going to have a hard time doing so ... I am always very careful and specific about what I say and do. I have been very specific and detailed about my investment and perspective on XYBR. Can you please explain your lying about this?
> Using what skills you may have to this end, is something
> of your character that I hope few share. I am sure that
> you will excuse yourself of responsibility, or again tell
> me of your feelings.
And I too am glad that few share your lack of integrity, and inability to openly discuss. I was truly hoping that I had found an intelligent person to discuss this area with ... and I hoped that you would reply with an informative post, and one which addressed the issues. But instead, it again becomes the personal attack. I'm sorry that you just can't seem to keep up ... it *is* a rapidly changing world ...
> Its your deeds, by the way.
Hmmm ... I'll have to try and translate this ...
> hasta
Manana
Scott C. Lemon |
