RE: RE: RE: RE: Lookie there boyz!I am sure that the insiders were very pleased at the chance tomake lots of moolah by getting millions of shares at rock-bottomprices. I assume they didn't know anything that the regularshareholders didn't already know. So according to your bonkers theory,you should be thanking everyone, since you also benefitted.
I took advantage of the low share price of a company I'm interested in. It would appear that insiders have done the same.
Considering how many times you've tried to persuade people that the positive information on the company's website, as well as pretty much anything else the company reported of a positive nature, was either b.s. or needed to be translated by you and your "palz" in order for the rest of us to understand, it seems a wee bit odd that you would now rue your success.
Keepin mind that you've been making defamatory comments about other postersat the same time the SP has doubled -- so would you agree that this isalso evidence for manipulation?
I've asked you to give me an example of any post I've made that wasn't true. Would you care to finally step up to the plate? Also, Chundie, how does one go about defaming and alias?
Having said that, when you file your complaint, make sure you take along a piece of picture I.D. that proves you are Chunderman, Chunderman's profession, etc.
I'm quite sure your real persona hasn't suffered by any comment of mine. However, Barker appears to be interested in determining if they can't play a role.
Have you askedStockhouse yet to confirm your multiple-alias theory? If not, youreally must do so. I imagine they are getting quite irritated at yourcharges of them colluding with thugs in order to keep a wonder companydown.
Why would I when you and the Lightweight have confirmed it yourselves. I'm quite confident Stockhouse doesn't make a daily exercise of comparing your I.P. address with that of other thugs.
Would you like me to repost your confessions?
Also, next time you're whining to Stockhouse ask them about their responsibilities Chundie, I did. They're quite confident that their disclaimer covers them nicely.
I am, however, disappointed that when I discussed your antics with them they weren't at all glowing in their assessment of you and "da boyz" and the person I spoke with thought my assessment of what you were likely up to was probably quite accurate, but they appeared to feel no great responsibility to "tune you up." I believe they should have. I also believe they wont stand in the way if someone with all the right paperwork shows up.
Again, you should ask them. I did!
But then again, they might just laugh atyour addlement, as you are also the person who claimed that Barker's SPsunk solely as a result of the economic recession! And they would laugheven more at the fact that you hide behind their "skirts" in order toremain anonymous -- at least to some.
I wouldn't say that Chundie.
I think I've made it quite plain that the recession has played a major role across the broad market, but your efforts, and those of your pals, should not be underrated. Especially in light of the FACT that it would appear your activities go beyond Stockhouse.
And, afterall Chundie, you and "da boyz" have put in significant effort to convince Stockhouseland of your "expertise" and "professionalism." You "ladz" aren't just run-of-the-mill chat board weanies, you "ladz" are real "profesionals" and not to be taken lightly, right Chundie?
Say, have you tried Jerry's Fabulous Ice-Cream?
I'm looking forward to perhaps meeting Jerry one day. If and when I do I'll mention how fond you are of his ice cream. But then, I'd be willing to be that, much as with most of what you post here, you can spin a better yarn than you can assess facts.
I'd be willing to bet you know about as much about Jerry's ice cream as you do about Barker's core samples.
HH