Way to dodge the legal notice thing, Jon. What is it, too mild for you? You'd prefer, as a non-shareholder, a real lawsuit so you can really lick your chops?
I know what a legal advisory notice is--I suggested it. It's a much more sensible proposition than your notion of suing unnecessarily and perhaps hurting the company's prospects in the process. Once again, nice anti-Zulu sentiment on your part!
Aleta, you do realize you're every bit like Jon when you're every bit like Jon, don't you? Why is your result so similar to his, more than not?
As far as Jon minding your own business? Interestingly, he said "no." So he won't mind his own business. His admission! Jon, face it, you fail the relevancy test! You're not a shareholder, never have been and won't be. What's your opinion really worth?
If Terry wants to fall for your trap, replete with the nice little Aleta back-up, and proclaim that Zulu should follow a King of the Hill OTC:BB strategy, that would be a mistake, in my opinion. Clearly, Zulu never was intended as a big deal penny stock. Someone prove to me that it was supposed that was Zulu's intention!
Early in the game Zulu announced its intention to get onto Nasdaq. What should it have done? Something else? Nonetheless, two-thirds to three-quarters of a year into early cohesion Zulu is accomplishing the Nasdaq goal. Sure, Terry posed great questions. No doubt about it. But the company still is making a great accomplishment. And, you, Jon Tara, you want to sue? Where's your head at?
This too is important! Jon Tara, if you're gonna quote me, do so accurately. You know how to quote an individual, don't you?
Here's your mistake:
You quoted me as follows, and this is exactly how you did it:
"Personally, I prefer to dream"
Wrong!
The full context of what I said to you was:
"Indeed, you [Jon Tara] pride yourself on being Zulu's worst nightmare. Personally, I prefer to dream otherwise."
Were you scholarly, you at least would have quoted me accurately: "Personally, I prefer to dream...."
But for the usual distorted reason you could handle the word "otherwise," never mind the preceding sentence alluding to your nightmarish pontifications.
So what's the use? You are as distorted as you think Zulu is. Why not admit this is true? Isn't it?
Why won't you? 'Cause you think you're on a high horse, but 'tis really only a sligh one. |
