I agree, Steak, and the respect is mutual. Over the years, we’ve had many private discussions because I value all perspectives, especially when we disagree, which isn’t always. I consider them all, and I like to think you do the same.
First, I want to make a point to anyone that reads this. The post I sent Del was based on facts, but his reply ignored all of them. He then continued to state things in his response that I felt were already addressed by those historical facts. Then came the vitriol, even after I warned him about slander with good intent—I never heard of such a thing. Don’t respond to that, Steak.
The only reason I come here now is to read your perspective, as you don’t rely on vitriol to share it. I don’t consider Lolli-pops as vitriol, and if it were up to me, you’d be allowed back on the other board. If that happened, I’d immediately remove Del’s board from my list and never look back.
Strict penalties for vile posts made by anyone, long-term shareholders or not, should be applied immediately, and I believe they are on RG’s board. Maybe a hiccup or two, but that’s to be expected by anyone.
But a permanent ban should only be for very rare cases, and imho yours should not one of them.
That said, I truly believe your permanent removal has been unjustified, and I urge RG to reconsider. If I understand your position correctly over these past few years, what you seek is accountability and transparency, and we all should. That should not be banned.
Your post today about AI bias reflects my concern about seeking unbiased answers. While your post made some strong points, some of them can be explained by the lack of Canadian approval in my opinion. I previously mentioned that no country would want to sell a product unapproved in its country of origin. I think you should seriously consider that. I think it's a fair assumption on my part, don't you’d agree?
Also, your AI post fails to mention the large legitimate partnerships we do have that are waiting for approval, That's important for me to point out. One bad affiliate does not make them all bad.
That's the trouble with biased questions, it only points out what you are seeking. Bad is bad. No more no less.
S0 you asked for a negative response, and you got one. However, much of it could be rationally explained if you think about it, though not all of it.
What I really seek is proof and precedent, but more importantly, clear guidance from the company.
I’ll need to review how these other filter competitors compare to Zen’s before commenting further. There’s a lot to go through in that post, and I will eventually.
Your post did address the reasons for the lack of mask sales, not to mention Zen stated that the profit margin wasn’t very good long ago. Combining this with the lack of HC approval for filters, where exactly should we expect revenue to come from? Masks were the fastest product to market, and despite the lack of sales, they laid the groundwork for filters. It was the obvious choice at the time, even though they’ve failed so far. Masks helped build the factory and accomplished much more than that.
I must say, your post reassured me to some extent that the BoD’s decision to have GF as an advisor could benefit Zen, especially with him being based in the US. He won’t have to address shareholders and has every incentive to succeed. If the right CEO is found for Zen, credibility at the mothership will improve during this critical time, and hopefully, the trend of overpromising will come to an end. I know this has happened, you know I'm not blind.
From what I understand, the BoD also wants to focus on transparency. We’ll see how that goes. My AI-generated report highlighted several precedents for Zen’s actions, which should be taken seriously given the evidence provided. I can’t stress this enough—I didn’t bring up the subject; the AI did on its own. I don’t think AI owns shares, so there’s no reason for it to pump anything, lol. All I did was ask what it meant by its statement, which I think is significant. I wish I still had the original discussion; it was just a small, offhand comment.
I’ll take the time to carefully review your post, Steak, since it seems to have valid points based on my initial impression. I hope you do the same. Also, don’t let Del convince you that people on the other board are your enemies; some just hold different opinions like I do, and we don’t deserve to be ridiculed or slandered for that. We’re all just searching for answers and guidance, that’s all.
I do understand your frustration with the perceived lack of opposing viewpoints allowed on the other board, likely due to your permanent ban. However, I believe that perception is often intensified by the disrespectful comments directed at Zen’s leadership and its shareholders. As a result, people get banned, and they should. It’s not so much what people say about Zen but how they say it. Being disrespectful and slinging insults is a tell-tail sign their full of .... and it's just a weak way to try to shut down debate. That’s fine too, as long as their happy talking to themselves.
You know that part wasn’t aimed at you, lol.
Have a good day. Oh wait.. it's night time. Time sure flies by eh.
G-man |
