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

Generation Mining Ltd T.GENM

Alternate Symbol(s):  GENMF

Generation Mining Limited is a Canada-based exploration and development company. The Company's focus is on the development of the Marathon Project, a large undeveloped palladium-copper deposit in Northwestern Ontario. The Marathon Project is 100% owned by Generation PGM Inc. (Generation PGM), a wholly owned subsidiary of the Company. The Marathon Project is located along the Trans-Canada Highway in Northwestern Ontario and covers a land package of approximately 22,000 hectares. The Marathon Project is estimated to produce about 2,122,000 ounces of palladium, 517 million pounds (lbs) of copper, 485,000 ounces of platinum, 158,000 ounces of gold, and 3,156,000 ounces of silver.


TSX:GENM - Post by User

Comment by AGTCTTWWon Apr 20, 2022 4:51pm
74 Views
Post# 34618036

RE:Stockhouse

RE:StockhouseAgreed 1000%, Rainyday.

I apologize for my own disruptive behavior to those affected here (other than the remaining troll.)

It's unfortunate that Stockhouse doesn't act to better their boards.   

After they banned passwordstock1p, I was sure his other alias timeoutofmind would be banned shortly thereafter, but no such luck, so I've had to persevere in highlighting his lies and injurious actions. He is quite a piece of work.

That Stockhouse administrators have never addressed their problems with trolls, pump and dump schemes and short and distort scammers is telling.  The law is not on their side to say the least and CEO.ca got it right.

A casual observer might not be wrong to conclude that this shows Stockhouse not only tolerates, supports and encourages this behaviour (by not banning it), but that they might actually be in on it.

Recall this 2016 post, which to my knowledge, clearly shows that nothing has changed in 6 years.

Stockhouse

Those greasy lawyers love to post those lawsuit press releases on Stockhouse.  Makes one wonder if they pay Stockhouse to do so.

And even when you win in court, it's too late, damage is done.  The government probably needs to address this since Stockhouse obviously won't.

CTVNews

"Stockhouse.com said it was unable to give the real identities of the posters to the plaintiffs. However it did provide email addresses, allowing the plaintiffs to serve the lawsuit."

Stockhouse had to be compelled by the court to provide this limited information.

https://theralase.com/theralase-wins-precedent-setting-lawsuit-against-anonymous-individuals-for-posting-defamatory-comments-online/

https://www.investmentexecutive.com/newspaper_/news-newspaper/anonymous-comments-prove-costly/

Here's a commentary about that case:

https://www.canlii.org/en/commentary/doc/2020CanLIIDocs3836#!fragment/zoupio-_Toc3Page1/BQCwhgziBcwMYgK4DsDWszIQewE4BUBTADwBdoAvbRABwEtsBaAfX2zgGYAFMAc0ICMASgA0ybKUIQAiokK4AntADkykREJhcCWfKWr1m7SADKeUgCElAJQCiAGVsA1AIIA5AMK2RpMACNoUnYhISA

In his decision, Myers J. underlined the court’s zero tolerance towards anonymous posters of defamatory content and reproduced the powerful words of Goldstein J. in Manson: 

[20] There are few things more cowardly and insidious than an anonymous blogger who posts spiteful and defamatory comments about a reputable member of the public and then hides behind the electronic curtain provided by the Internet. The Defendant confuses freedom of speech with freedom of defamation. There are, undoubtedly, legitimate anonymous Internet posts: persons critical of autocratic or repressive regimes, for example, or legitimate whistleblowers. The Defendant is not one of those people. The law will afford his posts all the protection that they deserve, which is to say none. 
 
 

<< Previous
Bullboard Posts
Next >>