Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Speaking only for myself,
he has as much right as anyone to post, but agree that a disclaimer would seem appropriate.
Happy Palm sunday to you as well.
Wow! Ken how did you miss this?
Thanks, groveswise.
Do you have a link for your assertion
that the stock was never naked shorted?
Consider yourself corrected. eom
YOU view it as being endorsed by the company.
You cannot speak for others. I've already stated that, imo, he should include the disclaimer. As far as I can tell he does not violate the TOU by not doing so.
Seems to me you're just being argumentative.
My posts and those of Bleu should be quite clear where we stand on the subject.
"They have absolutely nothing to do with MediaMax. They use a content protection system called AACS that has absolutely nothing to do with MediaMax."
If that is the case then this thread would be off topic, yes?
I don't think that every contested point need be addressed in the
board header.
Board readers are reponsible for the own DD. IMO there are posters here who intend to mislead, but use the terms of use rules to further their agenda. One in particular constantly attacks the company. You would have us censor mario, yet allow these others?
If that is the case then all this would be off topic, yes?
I would think that the disclaimer
should most certainly be included. Don't know about the legal ramifications.
That was not my point, nor is it my responsibility.
Our responsibility as moderator's, imo, is to help provide a forum where opinions, thoughts, hopes, re this company can be discussed in a fair and civil manner. To allow a known company rep to "pump" would take away from that IMHO.
Neil, you and I do not often agree on much,
but it is precisely because Mario is known to be a paid rep of the company that, IMO, he should simply post his info, and refrain from ANY encouragement to buy stock.
I can't speak for Bleu,
but for myself, the problem is not with the info but the not-so-subtle pump, ie. the bargain share price. Normally this might not even be considered a pump except for his previous history of pumping here even under multiple aliases.
Yep. The way some folks are always
on the attack, makes you think they might have a different dog in this fight, huh?
Nothing, to my knowledge has been announced.
Therefore any info on shareholders meeting is just speculation.
The next one, to me, will be the most important one, to date, and if I can fit it into my calendar, I will be there.
Waxing eloquent
are we?
Nah, this has been the norm as long as anyone can remember.
MMXT is being pumped by some daytraders.
It'll take real news about real revenue to overcome the MM's, imo.
Pretty major, as I recall.
More "defective" software. LOL
We may be in business.
I plan to sell some at $1.00
kenny, as you know, there was no infection.
Nor is the software faulty. Repeating it won't make it so.
No my "LOL" means that I find your contention amusing.
I place our tech in the same league with Windows by using YOUR definitions. Perceptive indeed. LOL
"phantom products"
You boyz have some strange definitions. In fact, your definitions seem to fit your own purposes.
So?
The EFF's position is critically against any and all copy protection.
Again, a strange definition, but whatever.
If you call our tech defective in the same way that Windows operating systems are, I can live with that "defect". LOL.
That's a strange definition, but whatever.
No mistake.
no, Sony-BMG stopped using us temporarily because of the First-4
tech and the resulting lawsuits which we unfortunately got grouped into. Did you forget that NONE of our CD's got recalled?
A "security vulnerability" does not qualify as "defective software" unless by that definition you would also consider "Windows" defective.
The problem with the EULA was that it installed even if rejected. IMO, it was setup that way on purpose. It is also my opinion it was done at BMG's direction. Company's do it quite often.
neil, you may believe what you like.
1. I am not close to the company at all. I am a minor shareholder
who happens to have been invested very nearly since the beginning. I have had virtually no contact with any employee of Sunncomm or Mediamax in at least two years.
2. There is a huge difference between a "security vulnerability"
which is a common occurance in software, ie. microsoft, and an infected computer. Can you provide a link where any computer was indeed infected because of our tech?
Your comprehension is your own problem. My statement was completely accurate.
kenny, you know very well that the software was not defective, nor was anyone's computer infected. Our tech's problem was in the setup for the EULA, which, IMHO, was set that way at BMG's direction.
Welcome.
That's bull.
Read the board.
And yourself.
No drive by personal attacks please.
Nothing I say will convince you.
I'm convinced. Time will tell.
Never was for me.
However, I remain convinced of our success.
Poor ken. Of course that is one way of doing it.
Perhaps there are other factors involved??? LOL
Especially if you're putting money
in to protect money that's already there, and you're convinced all you need is time for it to pay off.
Yes, if this is correct,
they have infused something over 300K so far this week.
It was posted here some weeks
(maybe months??) ago that there were some deep pockets who weren't going to let the company go under. Don't remember who. Maybe Howdy?
Oh, There's nothing wrong with it.
If memory serves, it's providing cash for operations. Don't quote me, cause I don't remember all the details.
Yep, looks like it.
We've seen these large block trades before. In the past they've been pre-arranged sales. Not clear about the details. Someone explained them here before.
Now THAT is the $64 question.
I'm certainly no expert, but I can't see where the law has any teeth, so far.