In no partucular order ,
CFlynn ,
It sure looks like you don't like to be treated like a shareholder . A couple remarks about YOUR responsiblities and you go off like a bottle rocket . If nothing else your entertaining .
I was accused of saying some "nasty things" and what I got back was "The nastiest thing you said was that it was their own fault."
Now lets look at "nasty";
"...where are you from", dude,,,"
"HOW MUCH CRACK HAVE YOU BEEN SMOKING???"
"...as for your implying I am somehow pulling a scam of some kind, f-you)" [BTW , where did THAT come from?]
"I'll tell ya this, buck-o,,,"
"(Sighs at the stupidity)....I didn't realize there was room enough up Fan's ass for two croneys. LOL"
~ I have had posts deleted and told THIS kind of thing (attacking , cursing , name calling wasn't allowed/tolerated . Apparently THAT is a selective rule .
If you (and the rest of the mob) are going to quote me , QUOTE me IN context . I never 'theorized' "...California State law firmly disagrees with your economic theory of "you've been paid quite enough."
What I said was;
"Like shareholders get told all the time by the bash/know-it-all element; it's over , move on , get a life , YOU took the risk , you should have known better , you have been paid quite enough by the investors , etc ." ~ A little different meaning IN the context of how shareholders are treated .
Anyway , apparently you are able to read things not-said/out-of-context and run like a faucet . Putting me on iggy will forego your dripping with venom self pitty .
I'll throw this in for good measure; "You are beginning to sound like that little flamer JackE Jettisoned ." And why not ? ;>)
m-bear ,
Besides making a mountain out of a mole hill , and mis-quoting; "The nastiest thing you said was that it was their own fault." , it seems like you are conceding to the fact that shareholders are unfairly resented and decent representation should be fair treatment for ALL persons harmed . Reading your follow-up posts , your having dialog is a mature way to discover another angle . There is hope for you yet .
I have NO trouble supporting employees . They were financially harmed and I am glad glad that they have an "alli" (Employment Div.) to guide/represent them .
For some reason (that eludes me) my (investors) wanting similar care/authority is somehow very selfish and wrong .
Anyway , for the future I would appreciate YOU and anyone wanting to take me to task for something I have said or implied , PLEASE provide the exact quote IN context and maybe you'll sway my thinking . TY
Avacado ,
Thanks (seriously) for your reply .
Your innocent selfdiscription is admirable . The only times I have called you and other bashers out (and I do) have been when you (guys) belittle shareholders like they're stupid and should have KNOWN Q-Frank was a scam .
May I call your (bashers) attention to the past/present fact that demeaning people is not a good way to garner their confidence/respect/consideration . Especially when the stock and company was flourishing . Pretty stupid way to expect results .
As for saving needle from buying Q-stock , I have a hunch the guy is already in . So let the guy post with the same courtesy YOU are allowed .
Anyway , thanks for your 8IGHT YEARS of diligently sitting there smacking a company and its investors even tho you have no vested interest .
Very admirable .
strider ,
I'm not sure what your gig is . Please tell me why shareholders shouldn't have legal representation/protection against embezzlement . For some reason I can't understand your destain for such a concept .
I was hoping the Bush Admin would have waged a war on stock market wrongdoing and imposed some HARSH penalties for fiduciary misconduct . Martha was a pathetic token jesture IMO .
Anyway , without said shareholder representation/recourse the markets and our country are severely crippled from the perpetration of criminal cheating .
I am hoping you are just looking for something to biitch about and don't really believe what you post . GL to you .
reddog ,
"You are nothing but an instigator, a narcissist and a chauvinist who has nothing of value to say."
~ instigator; Yeah , I can be . BUT , with the sole intention to raise an issue or check/question a posters behavior/desire .
~ narcissist; The love of or sexual desire for one's own body .
WTF are you talking about ? Once again I guess it's Ok for some to act/post absolute ridculous slander .
Moderator PLEASE !
~ chauvinist; Yep . And the women I know love it .
MY definition (not Merrian's) of chauvinism; A man that cares for and desires women to be charished and expects women to allow 'deserving' men to take a position of leadership .
Tough stance for butches I guess .
~ nothing of value to say; Perhaps .
I am going to leave your last post as a glaring reminder of the "value" YOU bring here .
BTW; Oddly enough , I get blamed for "crying" and the like , well look at the posts fired at me . There's definately some crying going on .
Don't waste your time with him. He's one twisted jerk who probably lives in his mother's basement and is forced to wash her hair and give her pedicures, hence his disdain for women. He starts the fight and then cries when anyone fights back. Read up on his history on RB under the name deadkatt. You will see what I mean.
Sorry for the long post but , I didn't want to try and keep up with people firing several posts at me before I was done .
Seeya's
