Replies to post #46366 on Decision Diagnostics Corp (DECN)

[loanranger]

"Lyons preferred not to have his email address exposed, and so Berman sent the "letter" to Lyons with his express approval."

Information like that gets redacted every day. That's how it is properly done.
The idea that Berman sent Lyons notice of Lyons' own resignation is laughable and there can be no sensible explanation for it.

Did the mystery informant ("Someone else on another board") say WHY Lyons resigned (or why Berman "resigned" him) by any chance?

Please identify the "another board"...the explanation provided isn't on any of the other boards that I looked at.

[CADguy57]

Again, the point is not about the resignation. The resignation is done and over with. What Mr. Lyons does now, i do not care about. The point is the inconsistencies in the letter. This doesn't look like it's the real letter/e-mail. No date of termination. No signature. Reversed e-mail addresses. Conflicting e-mail addresses. Just saying that on its surface, it looks suspect. Why they would do this, I don't know. But without a valid signature, it is absolutely invalid. I've spent enough time in court on contract disputes to know that. The only question I have is why an obviously fabricated e-mail? What do they gain? What's the risk/reward balance.