Larry, some WAVX related diatribe: in #msg-2317119 I posted:
RWK, one reason I post is mostly to avoid getting to many e-mails asking me the same question over and over about WAVX. Another is that you might be "all knowable" about WAVX and about technical warning signs a stock chart gives out when something is not too kosher in the back office. Others are not so "all knowable" and they should be able to see opinions from people that think differently than the main stream.
All these insinuations that if I do not own any shares, I should not post, are ludicrous, at best, nefarious at worst. First, I have owned shares in the "class period", and posted so. I did not believe in management's ability to make the business profitable then, and I still don't. I do believe in management's ability to hype the stock and create "appropriate" pump and dump periods. I don't and certainly cannot prove that that is indeed what has happened last year (in the class period), but I can read a chart that tell me something like that might be occurring. From there to trade the wiggles associated with a P&D is child's game.
Snackman, did not like it so he responded with #msg-2318247: We are so lucky to have you here. I am sure your ego never gets in the way when you are 'helping' people.
You said:
All these insinuations that if I do not own any shares, I should not post, are ludicrous, at best, nefarious at worst. First, I have owned shares in the "class period", and posted so. I did not believe in management's ability to make the business profitable then, and I still don't. I do believe in management's ability to hype the stock and create "appropriate" pump and dump periods. I don't and certainly cannot prove that that is indeed what has happened last year (in the class period), but I can read a chart that tell me something like that might be occurring. From there to trade the wiggles associated with a P&D is child's game.
Just how did they hype the stock and create "appropriate" pump and dump. This is so much BS that I think I will throw up.
Of course I ask you to prove this you will not have anything to say, correct?
To which I responded, of course: "Are you English challenged, reread my post", that post was deleted, why, I know not, but it simply referred to the fact that the gentleman does not understand what he reads since my post already stated, quite clearly too: "I don't and certainly cannot prove .....".
Finding that my attempt at brevity met with censorship, this morning I replied in #msg-2319819:
I don't know why you or someone else found it necessary to remove my response, it suggested (Are you English Challenged?), that of course to your inane question "Can you prove it?" was already responded to in the post that provoked your diatribe, you just do not comprehend what you read. As your post quoted mine, I'll repeat the part of the post you apparently failed to comprehend specifically my post already stated I don't and certainly cannot prove that that is indeed what has happened last year (in the class period),, so unless you failed to understand what I wrote, why ask again "can you prove it" if I already stated I cannot? Thus "English Challenged".
Since I expect this last post to be censored as well, I decided to keep this exchange here, where such censorship is applied only to political posts.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
