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 : Crystallex (KRY) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Islander who wrote (7996)	4/8/1998 4:06:00 PM
From: Moot	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 10836

Dr. Corredor's Legal Opinion Islander: Yes, I could. But I have already offered some comments regarding both Corredor's and Baumeister & Brewer's legal opinions in response to a suggestion by Al Miller and have no urge to add anything further at the moment. So, there is no need to wait anxiously. I suppose I could search out the posts for you, but I'm too busy. Doing what? Well, I could be checking out the cyanide capsule that I'm required to wear in my molar or reviewing my most recent marching orders. The truth of the matter, however, is that even if I were doing nothing more demanding than sitting here picking my nose, I couldn't be bothered expending the energy to make something available to someone who has absolutely no interest in considering anything that doesn't conform to their own preconceived notions. If you think I'm pedantic or idiosyncratic with respect to careful distinctions and arguments, you should thumb through a law book or two. But wait! I don't expect that someone who prefers to view an issue unclouded by fact or argumentation would feel the need to have some knowledge of law before pronouncing on a legal issue, would they? No, I thought not. If you and your cohorts are so secure in your knowledge of the outcome of this matter and are determined not to consider anything that might be construed as questioning the inevitability of that outcome, I wonder why you bother to post here or even read this thread. If Crystallex wins, as you seem so adamantly confident they will, the future share price will undoubtedly reflect it. You can't be posting here out of altruism, can you? Wouldn't it be even more altruistic to let the share price fall (assuming the constant repetition of eventual victory and re-posting of documents actually has a stabilizing effect on the price), allowing even more people to buy even more shares before the dramatic price appreciation? Or is it that you share the oft-stated concern for the 'little guy' who is already invested? Well, I make no claim to being a crusader for anyone. I freely admit that I don't know what the outcome will be. I also freely admit that I regret being drawn back into this discussion through my response to what I mistakenly took to be a serious invitation from Graystone. If it hadn't appeared in my 'In-Box', I would probably not have even seen his post--I rarely follow this thread any longer. The questions I put here were primarily rhetorical. I don't await a response. I will take a great deal more care in choosing what to respond to in the future. Regards.