SirVinny or Bob Zumbrunnen: Please read this and give your opinion on the board moderator. I have sent him and Matt a copy. Thank you.
Bobsnook66. I would expect the position that your in to handle such situation as you have with cantstandsya to be handled properly in a private mail. Not on the board where you can be cheered on by the catcalls of selected followers.
Now lets go over your post and the accuracy of it, or inaccuracy.
First, where is the personal attack which you speak of? I have gone over all of his 6 posts and have found none. And, there are no missing posts since he started posting.
His 1st post (2103) he asked a valid question. Of course if it's not one certain members on the board like, then it's not allowed. It's bashing. No diverse opinions please. He was against management and their salaries. And, as an investor, aren't you?
The 2nd (2108) Reiterated his position against management and their salaries. He didn't accept another poster's point. Again, that's not allowed? And, their was no personal attack in there.
His 3rd (2121) was in response to TRCPA. A pure difference of opinion. Again no personal attacks. The theme was again about management and salaries. And, good points. Kindly take note as an investor that one point has yet to be proven wrong. And, telling someone that their response was "circular logic" isn't a personal attack. That stretching it to try to hang someone.
The 4th (2126). Was addressed to you, tech and Tr. AGAIN, no personal attacks. It's obvious from his posts that he is not getting either an answer or all he's getting is brow beating. Some of the responses don't make sense to him. What's wrong with that? Or, when you're involved is a poster not allowed to voice such an opinion?
The 5th was to me and the reason for your sarcastic and unwarranted inclusion of my name in your post. Again, NO PERSONAL ATTACK. He has valid concerns that you and others don't see. So what? Again, what's wrong with it? He voices his concern about management. Isn't that allowed ion an Ihub board? It certainly is on others that are moderated differently I must say.
And, finally his last post (2132). To TRCPA. AGAIN AND FINALLY, NO PERSONAL ATTACK. So where do you get, "now a personal attack of not just one but all the posters on this board i take offence to." There are no personal attacks whatsoever. Just appears to be nothing but bias against a poster that doesn't agree with the "LONGS" of this board.
Where on earth has he "...impune the moral character of all the board members..."? There is no evidence of that.
He has, "insult the moral integrity of management and give nothing but negative insulting views of the company..." But, that isn't an issue for a board moderator is it? Investors have that prerogative. It's allowed on other IHub boards, why not this one?
"...but the next time you insult the moral character of the fine people on this board you will be gone." Or do you really mean, the first time he does it?
I'm going to forward this message to Matt and, hopefully through to Meredith. And, if that doesn't work, believe me, I will get through to someone to let them know of the apparent unfounded and unnecessary bias that you have show toward this poster and, obviously I'll be next, just to get responses like you have in posts 2136 and 2140 and 2141, which by the way a board monitor should remove as it is a personal attack.
Where was you sense of human decency with Tenzzi post that Matt had to erase from this board? That was okay, as he's one of the favored longs. Neither you or Chambers saw fit to delete that one. Now there was a clear case of TOS abuse if there ever was one and you as a upright board monitor let it go. Yet, you go after cantstandsya's post that all put together don't come close. Did you as politely tell tenzzi, "...but the next time you insult the moral character of the fine people on this board you will be gone. " I guess the definition of "fine posters" shouldn't be argued according to social standards of acceptance.
