To: Pugs who wrote (33117 ) 1/4/1998 11:26:00 PM From: Hawkmoon Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 55532
Pugs, Sure seems that way to me. You keep digging into my past posts and printing half truths about me that fit your half-witted perception of why I'm out here. And since this stock is not trading and I DON'T CARE IF YOU GUYS NEVER SELL A SHARE , I am free to ask any pertinent question that I want. And I ALSO DON'T APPRECIATE THE ACCUSATION THAT I'M BEING PAID to be a naysayer. Thus, my tone and manner is far more antagonistic to a select few members of the Cartel, you being among them. You are under the false assumption that you can use character assasination to convince the major naysayers that well... "maybe it just isn't worth it to post out here... screw 'em". But there you are wrong, Pugsly... you are dead wrong. It is worth it to oppose jokers like you and Riley who lead others into these types of situations where "big bucks" can be had without fundamentals or diligence to back them up. You make a mockery of all of those other groups of shareholders who spend time and treasure visiting companies, checking their facts, and then rolling the dice on their favorite stock. If no one opposes this mentality, then the SEC has won . They will have been permitted to label any stock that receives exhuberant participation by shareholders who DO THEIR DILIGENCE AND RELY ON FUNDAMENTALS , as merely being Internet Hype. You just don't get it do you?? RMIL is now the poster child of internet hype and the naysayers are out here to say that things that aren't in the interests of the Hypsters who are quite possibly selling the rest of the RMIL shareholders down the river. Why else would Riley be willing only to show a stock certificate dated 23 December after alledgedly taking delivery of shares beginning in August??? WHY?? Back to my movie. Regards, Ron