Ohhhhhhh. So you're saying the meeting left a lot to be desired, but those who attended are afraid of speaking out for fear of being criticized by the likes of Slurpallan, Mquiet, Prosper, Wendy, and so on?
The history of posting is that any opposing or view that differs from the commonly held conjectures of the chosen few are met with viscious person attacks. It is just not worth it.
Let me make a suggestion: say your piece. What I'm seeing here reminds me a great deal of the MTEI situation. Seven shareholders paid a visit to headquarters. There they learned a number of things that disturbed them, but they decided among themselves not to tell anyone, in part for fear of being criticized by other longs, and in part because they didn't want to give the "bashers" more ammo.
Their decision was a very poor one. Some of those who'd attended sold without telling anyone. And then the SEC shut down the company two weeks later. Needless to say, many longs felt they'd been betrayed by the "Mag7".
Apart from that, your conjecture about the statute of limitations is an interesting one.
