Itsonlymuni, you seem to want evidence, facts, links and validation - or rather others to provide them for you. Here is a recent example from RB:
1USGrant, first you have to provide evidence that what he posts is untrue and missleading. Can you do that? And provide facts with links that validate your assertions? All of Dragon's posts can be backed up. All you have to do is read the company's Sec filings, it's all in there in black and white with no need to spin. Good luck, you'll need it.
However, when it comes to your own posts you seem to content yourself with possibilities:
Btw, can you prove that all of the possibilities related by me in the posts you reposted are not possible? If you cannot, then why repost them? If it was to simply remind me and all others of the very real negative possibilities in relation to our company then I say "good job, you did well".
I post mainly facts and reasonable interpretations based on analysis of those facts. I am the first person to ask questions based on e.g. statements in SEC returns which raise potential issues, and have a history of so doing. I have no issue with examining all of the facts and both sides of any argument, in an open manner and in order to maintain an "honest forum" as you put it. What I do object to is the clever and subtle manipulation and non-ending posting of negative arguments, biased opinion and spin merely to further an agenda; as we typically see elsewhere and increasingly see here. That does not constitute a "balanced" view or an "honest" forum IMO.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
