Francois: As one who has spent a lot of time checking out and trying to expose stock scams, I understand and sympathize with your motivations here. But at some point it is easy to get so involved in a flame war that you lose all your effectiveness at achieving your goals, and I think your battle with Steve may have reached that stage.
If I understand your posts correctly, the two of you are fighting over whether Steve made adequate disclosure of his relationship with DCHT before his disclaimers started showing up in his posts in February. You may be right that he did not, or perhaps he is right that under the particular circumstances, it wasn't necessary. You have complained to the SEC about this, and at some point they may check it out and reach some decision as to whether or not to go after him on this issue.
But whatever it is that he was doing then, he is not doing it now. So I don't see what is to be gained by rehashing old battles. (Before anyone says that I am rehashing an old battle on the Antaeus issue, I only posted today because MTEY on Thursday just filed its new 10-Q, which once again shows that Antaeus remains in the "interesting idea" category, rather than in "real company capable of giving out million dollar contracts" mode.)
Obviously you will do what you want, but I would suggest you stop posting on the "what Steve did or did not do in January" issue, unless you come up with something new to say on that. If the SEC thinks he did something wrong, they will punish him, and if they don't, they won't, but in any event, it is irrelevant to what he is doing nowadays or to the prospects of DCHT. |
