PQRS - I want to thank you for your kind words and support. I've gotten a lot of favorable responses but yours was the most compelling. It says a lot about you.
When we first met on IHub, I realized you were someone who posted his mind and stood up for his values. I'd say we are much alike, with the possible exception that you leap a bit before looking, not necessarily a bad trait LOL. As I've started to watch your work over the past months, you have been one of the first to uncover and to post both positive and negative arguments and facts with respect to your stocks of interest. This upsets some longs often, but your approach has been even handed and you "call it as you see it."
I do believe that there is nothing wrong with posting negatives and that we longs only delude ourselves if we think this stuff should be ignored. I've often felt that doing my own analysis and discovering the whole story is better than being hit by a Pearl Harbor attack. It also has the added benefit of "cutting off the bashers at the pass." For example, if you can find out perhaps that an old filing really has nothing to do with the current state of affairs, you can pretty much "take the thunder" from a basher who wants to spam message boards with something say from 1997, which is really ancient history.
I've disagreed at times with some of rrm's TA or his picks, but I saw him as an honorable person who was freely giving his advice and not "luring" anyone into some type of P&D as the bashers have claimed. When I saw the extremely personal attacks and lies, I decided to stick my own neck out as I often do, both online and in real life. The support by PM is always appreciated but it's those, such as yourself, who are willing to step up to the "bullies," who can change things.
After all, if Rick is silenced, then perhaps I may be, because of threats and personal attacks that have no arguable relationship to an online post, then who is next? I know it's sometimes a trite argument, but the truth, throughout history is clear. If YOU don't stand up, nobody may be there for YOU when they come after YOU.
Further, I think I've pretty much, along with others, discredited the so-called "research department" upon which so many PLNI bashers seem to rely, rather than doing their own DD. In essence, they do what they claim "pumpers" and their followers are doing. Again, I find no fault with specific negative facts and opinion with respect to a stock. But going forward and attacking a poster and then threatening him because of one's own lack of logic or even perhaps inadequacies, does not make for a "research department."
This particular "research department" has announced that he is attacking companies because of a perceived relationship of those companies with me or with Rick or other of his perceived adversaries. The only "evidence" he has is that I (or others) have posted favorably on the companies. If posting favorably about a company is a reason for indictment, then many readers here need to be aware. The good thing about all this, I believe, is that as a result, anyone with even the slightest objectivity and anyone with an ounce of intellect and reasoning, will ignore this particular "research department." I'm convinced that others will see posts that rely on this "research department" and will use your post and mine and others' posts to show that the claimed research is nothing more than a "hatchet job," motivated by the individual's own personal embarrassment on message boards or by his own inadequacies or impotence. I post about 50 or even 100 stocks during a short time period. So, if he wants to attack the companies, in which I may invest, he's got a lot of work to do, and I'm just one poster. His credibility, I believe, can't go any lower. Even bashers will likely realize this and find more reliable sources in the course of their endeavors. As in real life, "bullies" often are all bluster, able to motivate others through fear and threats, typically unable to back it up when challenged and when the majority sticks it to him.
Given the way "blogs" have proliferated, I suspect that this will continue and we should all be aware. It doesn't take much for a "blogger" to set up a website. Even if he has no audience, he can plant his information through the use of "alias deception" as this blogger has tried to do, or through others who search for any information (perhaps not even knowing the source lacks objectivity or credibility) that will bolster his argument with respect to a particular stock.
After all, a "research department" that is motivated not by objectivity but by the need to "get back" at an individual for a perceived slight, clearly has lost any credibility he may think he has. I suspect that even the bashers, and I use that word lovingly, are re-assessing their reliance on someone whose only real asset perhaps is that he is a pitbull, able to bully until someone kicks him in the teeth with the truth.
Thanks again. |
