RE:RE:RE:Friendly WagerYes, I now agree Adamchess. I posted earlier that I retracted my opinion once I understood the posting string. and for the record after examing his posts, I do not believe that he is not notwrong and furthermore don't know why he would have the need for aliases because he has no trouble holding back bearish analysis when he feels it is warranted. But I do agree that the strong bulls on the board do seem to take offence. Hopefully, we move off the topic of aliases and to more thoughtful discussion of CXR !!!!
adamchess wrote: I don't see how this proves that notwrong and Chartschool are working together? It is merely that they are both moderately bullish on CXR compared to the rest of us being full bulls. Cheers.
123Health wrote: HERE IS PROOF tthat CHARTSCHOOL is SHORTER and working wiht notwrong
ChartSchool wrote: Sruggstyle, I would like to enter into the "friendly wager" invitation that you extended to fdfd12 on February 12th, with the understanding that the numbers would be upwardly revised to reflect the recent share movement since the date of your invitation to fdfd. I am thinking a low six figure wager, with a legally binding agreement in place outlining our terms of engagement, with all legal fees and disbursements paid out of the winner's proceeds. You can select the lawyer, as long as they are a member of the Law Society of Alberta (where we both reside, so I anticipate no problems on this front). May I suggest we write in a clause where a % of the winner's proceeds goes to a mutually agreed upon charity? Time is of the essence, so can you email me and we can work out the details?
Regards, Chart
Here is PROOF that CHART is SHORTER