A "shill", as I understand it, is a person who is compensated for making a product/service/stock seem desirable when it is not, or at least more desirable than it is.
That does not seem to describe Shell or Mitchell and similar parties. They seem calm enough, and at least some of the information I have seen posted has proven out, where I can check it.
Bashing would be a better description of anti-company behavior, and your own chosen moniker reflects your position there well enough.
Somewhere between strident destructivism against a company and hysterical name calling on behalf of a company is a truth, and that is what interests me. I have been pursuing this thread as a source of, if not the truth (a lot to hope for here) at least good leads. That has panned out well, and the legal cases are interesting indeed.
I see a consistent tendency on the part of Spider Valdez to write as if he knows what the legal documents say, yet what he writes is completely at odds with the facts of the case. Regardless of his perception about maneuverings in the background, the legal cases have a finite number of things that can be said about them truthfully, and Valdez invariably says things that are not true about these cases.
May as well make this public...
Spider, why would you do that?
Level Head |
