Well stated. It was very gracious of you to even give such an explanation of whether or not "you owned shares". There seems to be quite the ridiculous notion that someone has to own shares or even want to in order to discuss a stock, its promoters, or insiders. The posts of "move on", "why are you here" kind of BS is just totally illogical and only used as fodder for pumper clowns.
These boards, unless specifically for something else other than the particular stock or company (and include many companies or stocks), are for discussion of that particular company and its people behind them like paid promoters, shell owners, officers, etc.
There is no "admission" (with exception of course to non free boards) required for discussion or reason to be there and anyone has every right to come in and discuss and put out information or give their opinion on any particular stock and their insiders.
There is also can be a line drawn sometimes what the actual "company" owns and what the insiders or shell owners own. For example, Pawson many times has been stated not to be an actual officer, but does have many involvements with several "companies" (term in which used very loosely) including BNPD, and definitely has an effect with shares owned and sold and does have effect in the pps of each of those "companies".
But all this interest in whether or not anyone has shares of any company is more or less irrelevant and only maybe a very small part in one’s own decision to have any.
Factual reasons why one does or doesn't might have more relevance and again it was very gracious of BB to give those.
