To: Sandi who wrote (74 ) 7/23/1998 11:01:00 AM From: Dixie7777 Respond to of 1574
Sandi, you appear to have a continued challenge with either the truth or you don't know how to do research in depth. Again, I'd suggest you check the following. And by the way, one oof the references is to another firm but the substance of the deceptive negative postings remains intact. Take your time, read and comprehend and then tell us you believe what you just posted. With all due respect, Rich At the site that the links below will take you to, there are 20 postings. All but 2 have names and returnable address's associated with them. The only 2 that are this way are ones with slanderous and libelous comments about TSIG. There are however, 2 other comments about TSIG that are complimentary. (The rest are irrelevant.) Both of the authors to these comments are addressable. Think back as to how we have been informed about this info? And draw your own conclusions. 7/23/98, A non-identifiable source but cross-referenced to the other non-identifiable one dated 7/17/98, innuendo, and slanderous remark. (Again referencing activity years ago.) Obviously timed with/for an effect on activity in the share price. x10.dejanews.com . 7/20/98, An identifiable source, good (current) comments, CCSI Press Release x10.dejanews.com . 7/17/98, A non-identifiable source, therefore only slander & innuendo referencing activity years ago. x10.dejanews.com . 7/6/98, Identifiable and addressable person, good recommendation for (current) TSIG x10.dejanews.com . I personally believe that with all the news surrounding the recent court ordered release of names of posters to any and all web sites, (Canadian, soon to be US,) that have the intent of slander and libel, TSIG management pursue this as vigorously as possible. IMHO the person who did this was not very . wise! The intentions appear quite obvious to me, if not transparent to anyone who digs a little deeper than just one post. Rich