>>>Gee whiz, Jon, I'm trying to review past, substantive posts, and its
seems you are up to about 999 negative comments to -0- positive ones. I
am sure this is just a "typo" on your part, or you forgot you were the
champion of impartiality, or you just forgot you were leaning a little
bit one way, and you can point me to a thread where you have made a
positive statement or comment about the prospects for a stock. Not that
there is anything wrong with being a sorry sack of you know what, of
course (LOL, LOL).<<<
Terry, I thought you knew his history on this thread. He's appeared, day and night, right after Wired came out with its slime journalism. We've had him down NETZ/ZULU/ESVS ever since. I'll leave the irony of this for him to describe. After all, I don't want him to receive too many apologies from me.
I don't like being negative on him--or anyone, for that matter--but sometimes it's a necessity. What I find most ironic is that you come into a stock discussion thread in order to defend erroneous remarks made about the stock in which you've invested. After a while, in the course of your defense, you get labeled a "hypster." Ha!
Since when is sharing positive opinion a form of hyping? The irony is, because of the likes of Jon, Other Chap and others, it becomes difficult for people who are positive on the stock to share negative criticisms because all that space gets taken by those who throw mud instead of objectively criticize. |
