Join today and have your say! It’s FREE!

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Please Try Again
{{ error }}
By providing my email, I consent to receiving investment related electronic messages from Stockhouse.

or

Sign In

Please Try Again
{{ error }}
Password Hint : {{passwordHint}}
Forgot Password?

or

Please Try Again {{ error }}

Send my password

SUCCESS
An email was sent with password retrieval instructions. Please go to the link in the email message to retrieve your password.

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Quote  |  Bullboard  |  News  |  Opinion  |  Profile  |  Peers  |  Filings  |  Financials  |  Options  |  Price History  |  Ratios  |  Ownership  |  Insiders  |  Valuation

Bullboard - Stock Discussion Forum Cangold Limited CGLJF

GREY:CGLJF - Post Discussion

Cangold Limited > Rick????
View:
Post by Sophia123 on Jan 24, 2015 2:01pm

Rick????

YOU are avoiding the QUESTION Rick Mills.  HAVE YOU BEEN RUNNIN MULTIPLE PROFIELZ FOR A LONG LONG TIME??? 

Where is RustyWaterGuy and BullorBear?? and the others???  

ANSWER THE QUESTION!!!!

Sophia123 wrote: Rick???  What do you think about people with multiple profielz pumpin stock like George at Agoracom???  Kinda soundz like YOU huh?? Tsk Tsk!!!

https://agoracom.com/members?message_id=1984398

IP Check Results

Message: Re: Resource exploration: Buyout announced
Image
Mail Room (10)
Votes: 15 Score: 1.7
  •  
Avatar
Treasurer (732)
Votes: 25 Score: 3.0
  •  
   

About the IP Check Tool

Listed above are all users who have last logged in from the same IP address as the message poster.

Two usernames who consistently show up together in the IP check tool could be one person with two users in the system, it could be two different people sharing a computer, or office network. It does not constitute a violation but is simply additional information that members can use in assessing the credibility of a post.

A user's IP address represents how they have connected to the internet and may change from time to time if they log in from different locations such as home, work, or a cafe. A notebook computer typically changes IP addresses as it connects to different Wi-Fi networks. Many DSL and cable service providers also choose to rotate the IP addresses used by their customers from time to time for various reasons.

It is also common for IP addresses are shared between multiple computers such as on an office network, a Wi-Fi enabled cafe or hotel, and most smart-phones. As such, an IP address by itself cannot be used to positively identify a specific user.

In order to preserve the privacy of our users, the IP address is not being displayed, however Agoracom is running a query which will identify all users who's last login IP matches that of the message poster.

Wherez RustyWaterGuy???  
 

IN THE MATTER OF THE SECURITIES ACT,
R.S.O. 1990, c. S.5 AS AMENDED

– and –

IN THE MATTER OF AGORACOM INVESTOR RELATIONS CORP., 
AGORA INTERNATIONAL ENTERPRISES CORP., GEORGE TSIOLIS and
APOSTOLIS KONDAKOS (a.k.a. PAUL KONDAKOS)

STATEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS
OF STAFF OF THE ONTARIO SECURITIES COMMISSION



Staff of the Ontario Securities Commission (the “Commission”) make the following allegations:

I. OVERVIEW

1. This proceeding relates to fraudulent on-line posting activity by Agoracom Investor Relations Corp. (“AIRC”) and Agora International Enterprises Corp. (“AIEC”) (collectively “Agoracom”), an on-line investment relations firm, and its management, George Tsiolis (“Tsiolis”) and Apostolis Kondakos, a.k.a. Paul Kondakos (“Kondakos”) (collectively the “Respondents”) in breach of the Securities Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.S.5, as amended (the “Act”) and in a manner that was contrary to the public interest.

2. Staff allege that the Respondents’ course of conduct spanned from at least September 1, 2006 to July 31, 2009 (the “Material Time”).

....

III. FRAUDULENT POSTINGS BY AGORACOM MANAGEMENT AND REPRESENTATIVES

11. According to their website (www.agoracom.com), Agoracom “caters to the IR and marketing needs of small and micro cap public companies trading on the TSX [and] TSX Venture…”. Agoracom offers pricing models for its clients which incorporate a monthly fee and stock options equalling the greater of 250,000 shares or 0.5% of a company’s fully diluted outstanding share total at current prices.

12. Agoracom’s online content includes webcasts, podcasts, and blogs. Perusal of www.agoracom.com is free and open to the public. Visitors are directed to client and non-client issuer “hubs” created and maintained by Agoracom. Among the features available on a specific company’s hub is a discussion forum, relating to the issuers’ securities.

13. Agoracom’s representatives serviced the client hubs by moderating their discussion forums and posting information and news to the forums. In order to post comments on the discussion forums, users are required to create a username and provide an e-mail address.

14. Tsiolis and Kondakos required their representatives, as part of their daily responsibilities, to post anonymously to the client forums using aliases. To post messages anonymously, the representatives created fictitious usernames and posed as investors blending in with other users, investors and interested persons. Representatives had between 40-50 aliases (some had up to 200) and were required to make a requisite number of posts per hub per day or risk having their pay docked. On occasion, Agoracom staff conversed with themselves on the forums using different aliases.

15. Staff alleges that during the Material Time:

  1. more than 24,000 alias posts were created from within Agoracom on client and non-client hubs;
  2. more than 670 alias user names were created by representatives of Agoracom and used on client and non-client hubs;
  3. alias posts originated from Tsiolis’ residence; and
  4. posts by Agoracom representatives, using their aliases, were promotional and promoted purchasing and/or holding stock.

16. Neither the public users nor Agoracom’s clients were aware that representatives of Agoracom were posting on their hubs using aliases. In fact, the Respondents knowingly deceived clients about the traffic and activity generated on their hubs. In particular, Agoracom reported the number of posts and shareholder inquiries answered by Agoracom’s representatives to clients on a monthly basis, and failed to disclose that a portion of the posts and shareholder inquiries were created by Agoracom’s own representatives. For certain clients, alias posts by Agoracom’s representatives represented a significant proportion of the postings within the forum.

17. The Respondents knew or ought to have known that the posting activity described above put their clients at risk of being in breach of the TSX-V Corporate Finance Policies governing investor relations firm activities and compensation.

18. The Respondents also took steps to actively conceal the fraudulent posting activity by its representatives. In March 2009, when a representative revealed that he was an Agoracom representative posting with an alias, the Respondents posted an “Official Statement” stating that these actions were carried out by a single representative and that Agoracom would be taking steps within next sixty (60) days to ensure that this would never happen again. This message to the public was false and misleading given that Tsiolis and Kondakos knew and instructed many representatives to create and use multiple aliases to post on all of the client forums. In addition, Tsiolis and Kondakos were aware that representatives continued to post using aliases after this Statement was released.

19. Staff allege that posting activity described above, mandated by the Respondents, was undertaken to create a misleading appearance of greater interest and trading activity in the securities of Agoracom’s clients to:

  1. induce clients to contract or continue to contract with Agoracom; and
  2. increase the value of Agoracom’s stock options.

V. SUMMARY

20. As a result of the conduct described above, the Respondents, directly or indirectly, engaged or participated in an act, practice or course of conduct relating to securities that the Respondents knew or reasonably ought to have known perpetrated a fraud on persons and companies, contrary to section 126.1(b) of the Act.

21. Further, the conduct outlined above was abusive to the capital markets.

VI. CONDUCT CONTRARY TO SECURITIES LAW AND THE PUBLIC INTEREST

22. Staff allege that the conduct set out above of the Respondents violated Ontario securities law as specified and constituted conduct contrary to the public interest.

23. Staff reserve the right to make such other allegations as Staff may advise and the Commission may permit.


Even a Farmer71 profiel on Stockhouse.  
https://www.stockhouse.com/members/farmer71

Soooo WHATz goin on huh Rick??? 
Comment by Sophia123 on Jan 28, 2015 9:23am
Well well well. LOOK who had his braggy poste I OWN 20K SHAREZ! removed. Good thing I quoted Bullorbear22 before Stockhouse removed it huh??? Now WHAT happend to BullorBear22??? What what what??? Oh. I remember. I reported him and nopoo2 for multipile profielz then they POOF!!! DISAPEARED. LOTZ of other Bullorbear22 posts still their. But I OWN 20000 SHARES& ...more  
The Market Update
{{currentVideo.title}} {{currentVideo.relativeTime}}
< Previous bulletin
Next bulletin >

At the Bell logo
A daily snapshot of everything
from market open to close.

{{currentVideo.companyName}}
{{currentVideo.intervieweeName}}{{currentVideo.intervieweeTitle}}
< Previous
Next >
Dealroom for high-potential pre-IPO opportunities