Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Conversion Solutions Holdings Corp. - A Scam? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Purl Gurl who wrote (1664)	10/12/2006 9:24:29 AM
From: rrufff	Respond to of 4624

Purl Gurl, I agree with many of the things you say, but disagree with many other things you say. As an advocate of open expression, surely you should understand this. Also you should understand that you shouldn't put words in someone else's mouth. Let's start with your post about the website. I don't have to speak for Dave, but he was saying that this is a private business and if your intent is to be critical of it, they have the right to ban you. It's simply a business fact of life. There is no 1st amendment right that controls over the rights of owners of a private site. Nevertheless, he wasn't saying that you would be banned because of your opinion on stocks or bashers or pumpers, but rather because they don't want to be an advertisement for someone who is critical of their business, separate and apart from the content and discussion you may post. As for bashers, I've not commented on the truth or falsity of any the sources you mention so please don't ascribe them to me. I do believe that there are negative posters paid or associated with moneyed interests. As more and more is being discovered about the tactics of hedge funds, this is becoming more and more understandable. It's human nature. There are hedge funds of all sizes and types. It's absurd to claim that only positive posters have pecuniary motives in their posting on message board. We've seen published reports of hedge funds paying for bash pieces. We saw the transcripts of the Elgindy trial, in which hedge fund managers participated in the active Enterprise, which included bashing from board to board. Further, hedge fund managers posted here on SI and it was common knowledge. An attorney was recently chastised by the court for posting on Yahoo. Where there is motivation to make large amounts of money shorting, there will be paid bashers. They may be part of a manipulative enterprise and getting an indirect benefit so as to attempt to avoid being labelled as being manipulative, but that doesn't change what they do. Those are just the larger players and the ones that have been in public commentary as a result of SEC activity. Smaller hedge funds likely have the principals commenting on message boards every day, attempting to short and distort. It's human nature when you mix money and opportunity to manipulate. I find it absurd that people go on boards and complain about so-called paid touts and then claim there are no paid bashers. The type of payment may be indirect or as part ownership of the enterprise, but it's similar manipulation. To deny this is to just put one's head in the sand. As for you comments on CSHD, as I mentioned I am NOT long the stock and did miss the opportunity as I found the basher comments more compelling and logical. However, I've learned over the years that each of us are not smarter than the market over time. So, I can find positives on both sides. This stock has so many potential stories. For the longs to be wrong, almost every aspect has to be a scam, which it could be. But, posters are disingenuous if they merely claim that something is a scam because they say it is. It's not as easy as that. Similarly, it's not as easy as those who claim that something is simply going to be "reset" to a huge price increase. So, I agree with much of what you posted but you are trying to simplify complicated situations and you let your own opinion affect your view of the facts. It's illogical to claim that there is scamming everywhere on the long side and virtually none on the short side. We've seen evidence of that in trial transcripts, on message boards, in pending litigation, etc.,etc. I'm not going to change your mind but it just doesn't make sense. There is plenty of scamming to go around and that statement can probably be applied to this stock, with the answers not as clear cut as you and others suggest or want to believe. Just my opinions. Have a good day.