I guess I landed in the Twilight Zone because I haven't used any 'foul language' at all. Yes, I was harshly critical of your assertion that you expect the pps to increase 160 times in a few months' time, from .25 to $40. Because those pipe dreams you expressed here are just so old and tired. In response, you made up a lie that I said anything foul-mouthed (in the normal sense of the word and not straight rational criticism of fairytale talk). False and crazy.
I don't know what made you lie like that. Maybe it's the thing I've been seeing on this MB, where I give somebody a bit of hard push back of their ideas, and they completely fall apart and rant nonsense or curses back at me. Do they think a MB like this is supposed to be free of rational discussion and analysis of facts? FWIW you also invented more nonsense out of thin air about how I bought shares for .35. That was crazy.
As for my so-called negative language: among other things, we just got fantastic, really game-changing good news, yet the stock then rose 30% only to fall back down 30%. I feel negative about that, and the lack of traction in the stock over the whole last year - because those are the facts in the real world that don't favor longs. Commenting on them doesn't make me a member of a cabal of professional shorts and manipulators. That price action might involve manipulation, but nobody can prove that's all it was, with zero legit sellers and traders involved.
More likely than not, the stock will open .02 higher on Monday and move further back up after that. But I sure don't know how any longs make a positive out of all the action we saw this week. Somebodies might well be trying to induce fear or panic, and I'd love to think that action is fake, but I don't make a habit of explaining away stock moves I don't like with 'it's just those damn shorts, doesn't mean squat' without any proof. That's not being negative, it's being smart.
I'd love to discuss any rational, positive outlooks with anybody here as long as they are mainly reality-based posters who are willing to explain the facts and analysis behind their ideas and not just assert pie-in-the-sky extreme predictions not backed by reasoning. The Advent deal sure does make it seem more likely that some further deal or the other is likely to follow MHRA approval. I posted that views about that in case you missed it. I also included my view on why that might not turn out to be a fantastic deal that will bring a complete revaluation of the stock. Nothing is guaranteed, and it's wise to keep different possible scenarios in mind. There's nothing negative about that way of thinking.
Market Data 
Markets 
