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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Plastic2Oil, Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Reseller Mike who wrote (517)	3/20/2013 2:14:22 PM
From: Rawnoc	Respond to of 621

Bullshit. The word "permanent" is used throughout the settlement document, but it's not used with the officer ban section so it's not clear if it's a 5 year ban or not. Simply doesn't say either way. Looks like a clerical error because it's not clear. I highly doubt it's a lifetime ban. But you guys haven't gotten a single thing right with the SEC to date, so why stop now even at the very end? lol

To: Reseller Mike who wrote (517)

3/20/2013 2:50:36 PM

From: Rawnoc

Respond to of 621

Even this guy ( okcupid.com ) gets it.

jaxstraw			Wednesday, March 20, 2013 2:40:06 PM
Re: Fisch post# 218940			Post # of 218943

There's a 5 year ban. Not permanent.

It is the exact same Order that was presented to the Court, that only needs the Judges signature, in conjunction with the Consent that was signed by Bordynuik.

Look at the top, it carries both dates.

As soon as the Order was signed, the ban agreed to, and signed by Bordynuik in the Consent, takes effect.

To: Reseller Mike who wrote (517)	3/20/2013 6:01:50 PM
From: Rawnoc	Respond to of 621

5 year ban -- you are absolutely and completely dead wrong. Right at the top is says this is a CONSENT of judgment and references the 1/23/13 pacer doc. The 1/23/13 pacer doc says 5 year ban is what was consented to. The 3/18/13 order is identical to the 1/23/13 proposed order, in fact, the judge just literally crossed off the word "proposed" and kept the rest of it, copy and paste. The proposed and now final order itself for the judge merely references statues that give the judge the power to make rulings that are in line with the settlement. Even if one attempted to nitpick, the absence of a timeframe in the order would default back to the consent, especially since the 3/18/13 order references the consent without repeating the verbatim but gives the date and case number. Therefore unequivocally this is a 5 year ban. Lifetime ban is just as fictional as disgorgement. There's none of either. Did you catch this line by the way? "wavied findings of fact and conclusions of law" Looks like Johnik was 100% correct, as usual. The others cases just died a violent death.

To: Reseller Mike who wrote (517)	3/20/2013 6:20:48 PM
From: Rawnoc	Respond to of 621

Man this defeat sucks. Well at least we have a picture of the IR guy drinking a beer at a pool, proving that he has a social life outside of the internet. We sure showed JBII! lol lol lol lol lol

To: Reseller Mike who wrote (517)

12/18/2013 1:32:00 PM

From: Rawnoc

Respond to of 621

LOL, is this serious? a burst disk is about the size and look of a thin black Frisbee. It's actually a quite simple device -- that's the point of it. To create the weakest point in a system to direct any overpressure where you want kind of like a circuit breaker for an electrical system. Replace circuit breaker in two seconds and done.

To: SteveF who wrote (38255)	12/18/2013 1:11:35 PM
From: Reseller Mike	Read Replies (1) of 38263

My guess it was down even up until the AGM time frame. Kind of makes a lot of their current statements possibly outright lies. Of course we will never know the extent of damage or how easy it is to replace the overpressure safety device since they are typically catastrophically destroyed and require replacement not just simple 'reset and lets move on type' devices.