Replies to post #209120 on The Question and Answer Board (IHUB)

[Yolo]

I disagree, although I think there should be some expectations of civility.

Currently, you can attack anyone that disagrees with you if you phrase it properly. What you can't do is post about an individual or bring up what they've said in the past that was wrong.

I try to do research and proper DD and support my opinions with fact. Some people don't like it because they think I'm being negative about their stock. That's fine, they can share their opinion and I can share mine.

But it is frustrating when they consistently claim that I'm wrong with no basis, or say my predicted timeline is hilariously bad, but I can't bring up any of their previous clearly erroneous predictions. Like someone said a stock would be pink current every week from October until it actually happened in February, which was clearly fluff and disingenuous. Then in March I said share cancellations wouldn't finish until July, and every week he's told me I'm wrong and it will be much sooner than that... Yet next week is July and they aren't done yet.

I welcome the change that let's us address other people in a dialog, a back and forth, making actual arguments. I'd like there to be more civility, so that requirement shouldn't be thrown out with the bath water, but right now it is frustrating how you can't respond directly to someone.

[Margin Buu]

You say, “attack” I say finally give users the uninhibited ability to point out the grifters that have no intention of helping readers make informed investment decisions. There’s no community in real life where people are allow to go about their business unchecked; If they get a bad reputation, people warn others about them.