Not sure what the point is, if any, of your post. My comment was not meant to put you on the defensive. Is there a reason for you to be defensive? It was a quick "hello," in explaining why I chose to comment on your posts on both ACHI boards.
The rest of your post is pretty hard to follow. I'll try to respond.
Yes, I'm proud of my posts. If you have a problem with a specific post of mine, feel free to bring it to my attention.
Yes, I am critical of internet hypocrites. Specifically, I am critical of those who criticize others merely for posting their thoughts, and who claim to be for internet freedom. I'm also critical of those who post over and over on stocks that they claim not to own and then claim not to have any financial compensation or trading association. That's often where I invoke the catchy phrase, "my scam is ok, yours is not." Yes, I also am critical of those who post their opinion and make it appear that it is a fact, that they somehow know something factual, when it is merely their opinion. I can be critical. You are often critical. I have no problem with you being critical. Just so we understand each other, my being critical is merely my opinion and my posts are pretty clear that I am expressing it. Again, feel free to bring me any post where you disagree and we can discuss it civilly.
I have no problem with your posting your opinion. I guess where you are having a problem is with my characterization of your post. I was not calling you any names. I interpreted your post as being a statement of fact. I will reference it here and let others decide for themselves.
Message 23093994
I merely asked if you had information that indicated the shares had actually been issued as your cited post seemed to indicate.
I'm not sure why you gave a disclaimer from Yahoo as to facts vs. opinion. This is not Yahoo or RB, thank goodness. I haven't seen a similar statement from SI or IHub administrators as you claim. If you have a citation, please give it.
If a poster says, and I'm not saying you did this, "it's a fact that this is a scam," or "it's a fact, that the CEO is a crook," then you seem to be saying that every post is "protected" as being merely opinion.
I don't agree with that. I'm not taking a point of view that includes only so-called "bashers'" opinions. If a positive poster says, "it's a fact that the company is going to be taken over tomorrow for $50 a share," then I do not think that post is necessarily an opinion, and, depending on the context, may have some consequence for the poster.
Whether there are consequences of your posts or anyone else's would be a question of fact and depending on what type of environment in which such post was being questioned.
I'm not criticizing you as a poster. I had a specific reference to your post and I'm sorry you took it personally.
But, here is your post.
I'll ask others, if they feel like it, but it sounds like you are saying that they already issued another 30 million shares. When I asked for your proof of this, rather than saying you have none, you seemed to become defensive. I'm not sure why. I have no problem with your retraction, which I now interpret as your opinion only that this has happened as you have no evidence that it has happened.
HERE IS YOUR POST:
see [ACHI] recently issued some 30 million of S8 stock.
Is this company diluting to pay the bills? . . . .
Message 23093994
Then you cited the S-8 and I replied that the language of the S-8 does not indicate that any shares have already been issued. If you disagree, again, please provide information that shares have been actually issued.
Hope this clears up any cornfusion. LOL. |
