Ah come on, Matt. What an ego! No one questions the accuracy of your posts, but rather the relevancy. Translation: your obessision with focusing on yesterday with a Y2K stock is IRRELEVANT to me and (I would be willing to bet) the vast majority of folks who particpate on this thread. In other words, Matt, your incessant mantra about management and financials is IRRELEVANT. And probably rather subjective. They are opinions, for the most part, and the message that we keep trying to get throughto your is that they are IRRELEVANT, Matt. Hey, it rained yesterday. I shouldn't plan on taking the family out for our Labor Day picnic because it rained in January!!! As I am sure (or at least hope) you would agree, the fact that it rained in January (or February, or March, or _____ [fill in your counterpoint]) is no indicator that I should call off TODAY's picnic. However, given your self-proclaimed intolerance for risk (ever heard of CDs?), if you lived here and had planned said picnic, I would highly recommend that you, Matt, cancel said picnic, because it rained last year as well! Get it?
You have an agenda, or else why would you keep posting on a thread about a stock for which you claim no interest? You argue that we should have to prove that you have an agenda. I submit that your actions drown out any protests to the contrary. We're not paranoid, Matt, we're bored bored bored with your constant whining mantra. Hint: WE DON"T CARE, so PLEASE take your self-proclaimed righteousness somewhere else and do yourself a favor.
Now, hopefully, back to some semblance of relevance around here.
Yep, folks, I know what you're thinking, Matt will just post again. We can't prevent him from doing that, and the fact that he does indicates that he indeed has an agenda. Granted, it may not be much more serious than just liking the attention he gets when people respond to his irrelevancies, but may I suggest that, from here on out, we simply ignore his posts, regardless of what he says or how he says it?
Ken |
