>>>Party, Jon's point is valid. This thread was all over Lichtman earlier because he
hadn't responded. Statements were made that this proved the questioner of Kevin
was correct. On the other hand, we should say Hayton's lack of response doesn't
prove anything?
I find it interesting that we were supposed to judge ZULU on it's own merits, and
ignore anything dug up about Hayton's past. Now we're knee deep in dirt on
Lichtman.
No one is disputing Lichtman's past, and I don't think too many here really think it
has much relevance to the value of ZULU stock. If he was part of a price drop in
the past, digging up dirt on him now isn't going to raise the price any.<<<
Bluefox, Jon's point is not valid where I am concerned. I believe if you check my past postings, you'll see my position regarding Lichtman was that I'd like for him to respond to where his research came from. I don't believe I ever condemned him for not doing so. Just as I have not condemned Hayton for not responding to allegations made against him.
In fact, I've repeatedly and specifically asked Lichtman to respond and provide a source of research that did not rely on Wired's reporting.
You will, however, note a presumption in my recent post where I indicated I didn't think that he'd respond to my question. This is because he's already ignored it. This was actually a tactic to influence him into responding to my question: Where did the SD research come from, other than Wired? Thus far, this tactic hasn't worked. He's only responded to Aleta's remarks.
Again, if you'll check, you'll see that I'm also on record several times indicating I, personally, would like to see a response from Hayton. Again, that he too hasn't responded, doesn't mean I'm going to condemn him for not doing so.
I would only condemn Hayton if he provided a response that was inexcusable or there was multiple corroborative indicators that throughly described the circumstances of what happened in the past. Wired's report provided no such comfort level sufficient enough for me to condemn a person.
Unless I outright condemned Lichtman for not responding, your point backing Jon's point is therefore not valid. You're welcome to check the record, but I have no memory of making any statement that condemned (and condemn is what folks have done to Hayton for his lack of response) Lichtman for not responding.
It may well be that other folks may have said something to this effect. But, remember, I have no control over someone else's thinking process.
All I hoped to accomplish by my recent Lichtman postings was to put some of the record in front of folks so that they could compare Lichtman's response to Aleta to the reality of his past.
One more time, so it's clear: I don't believe I ever condemned Lichtman for not responding. |
