[Chat - Level Playing Field]
Pat,
1. <<Your are a puzzlement>> -- Nobody ever said clowns were easy
to understand.
2. <<Who are you?>> -- Clowns are pretty selective about who gets
to see behind the face paint and the rubber nose. I've stated that I
am not an electrical engineer, but that leaves a lot of open territory.
I could be anyone from the Artist Formerly Known As Prince (wish I could
figure out how to type in that screwball sign of his from my keyboard),
to a former operative of the KGB (that should give all you conspiracy
theorists something to chew on), to an alien life form on the UFO formerly
behind the Hale-Bopp comet (trying to figure out how to beam these weirdos
back down).
Seriously, though, why does it matter, anyway? Shouldn't we
welcome *anyone* who tries to contribute verifiable information to this
thread, or tries to analyze AMTX's potential business and financial results
(even if their analysis ultimately turns out to be erroneous) so long as
they don't misrepresent "possibilities" as fact? I'm all for examining
"what if" scenarios, as long as they are clearly labeled as such. We should
be encouraging an open exchange of ideas here in a civil manner, IMHO,
especially in an area undergoing such rapid technological and regulatory
change. Hard for anybody to grasp all of it, and I certainly don't claim to.
Here, as elsewhere, portions of the conventional wisdom are
sometimes wrong (as evidenced by certain postcards). If contrarian opinions
are systematically attacked, they tend to sink to the level of "flame
wars" that generate much heat and no light, or to disappear altogether.
Either way, we all lose.
Then again, I'm assuming we all really believe that each of us
should "do our own homework" and make our own independent investment
decisions. Could be my mistake.
3. <<What's your background?>> -- No comment (see below).
4. <<Are you in the data communications industry?>> -- Some
think the data communications industry is run by clowns, but there are
just as many who think otherwise. I suspect if you took a survey across
many industries, you'd see similar results.
5. <<Are you in PR?>> -- I can categorically state that I am
not currently in Puerto Rico, but I've been there. Saw the ocean-front
fort from which the opening shot of the Spanish-American war was fired,
if I've got my history right.
6. <<Why do you send postcards to engineer?>> -- If you know I
send postcards to engineer, you probably also know that the "titles"
sequentially number them. Where do you think I am most likely to have
explained why I am sending them? Let's just say that I am not a big
fan of either censorship or excessive cheerleading (an atom bomb blast?,
what will it be if a GTE supply contract ever really does happen?).
7. <<I hope you'll be as open with your identity as I am with mine.
Consider it leveling the playing field.>> -- While it's true that you
have revealed a great deal of personal information about yourself here and
I have not, we have been on a level playing field all along. It's simply
a smaller field than the one on which you've become accustomed to playing.
While the wisdom of revealing so much personal information on the
Internet is an entirely separate issue, I have *never* posted anything that
could be construed as even remotely suggesting that your background,
education, or life experiences make you incapable of reaching correct
conclusions about AMTX. Nor do I plan to.
This leaves the focus where it should be, on the verifiability of
the facts we present and the logic of our respective arguments. You and
everyone else on this thread have always been, and remain, free to point
out any factual inaccuracies in my posts, and any flaws in my reasoning.
I'm certainly wrong about things my share of the time (just ask my spouse).
I try to avoid making comments or arguments based on stereotypes
in my posts. If I choose to restrict the disclosure of personal
information for whatever reason, and it has the side effect of preventing
some on this thread (not necessarily you) from stereotyping me, based on
my background, education, work experience, age, sex, financial status,
religion, national origin, or whatnot, that is my call to make.
If you or anyone else decide that the URLs I have supplied in at
least some previous posts, or the analysis I have done in others (that has
at least occasionally proven correct), aren't worth your time, you are
entirely free to click right on by my posts without reading them.
If anyone reading this is on the fence about whether I've
contributed anything worthwhile to this thread to date, I suggest you
open my profile and skim through my posts. One of the more recent ones
concerning the software upgrade path for ADSL modems contains multiple
URLs that took some time to put together, and within the last 2 or 3 days
I posted the URL for a Fortune Magazine article that provides details
about what Cisco looks for in strategic partners. Both of those topics
ought to be of considerable interest to most AMTX shareholders. If anybody
out there concurs, please don't clutter up the thread by saying so. Let's
keep the important stuff more accessible.
Bozo T. Clown
If you make an investment decision based on a comment by some Bozo,
you have only yourself to blame! |
