Otterman, you of all people should know that I do not follow any "rules of bashing", nor do I really care about being "taken more seriously". Those "rules of bashing" are usually found on the web sites of stock manipulators like Novak Capital. People who confuse stock ownership with advocacy are never going to take any negative information seriously. They simply retreat further and further into fantasies of "paid bashing" and hedge fund manipulation and naked short selling. As to the "confusion" and "misdirection": Link, please. You know I don't attempt to confuse or misdirect. An example of misdirection might be, for example, constant chattering about grammar--especially mysterious complaints about good grammar--instead of addressing whatever is being said. Anyone who chooses to read my posts is free to pay attention to what I'm saying; or ignore it; or pry at it to seek some real or imagined problem with it; or, God forbid, refute it.
As to my "thousands of posts", this will be #1,236 if the I-Hub count is correct (while Montanore's count is 1,446 and the old pumper seclorum's account shows 3,622 and our resident "savvy trader" weighs in at 5,524--under his current alias, which has been changed many times). I don't post nearly as much as those who frantically attempt to talk people into bad investments. I can substantiate (and have often done so) any claim I make about another poster. If someone is posting garbage, there is no need to look through thousands of posts to demonstrate it. There is no way to prove a negative, as I'm sure you know, so if someone want to impute bad motives or misdirection to me, the burden of proof is on him, not me. If no corroboration can be readily produced, it's pretty safe to assume there isn't any.
Finally, as I'm sure you're aware, there is no close link between the crow and me. We simply share some opinions (and have exchanged a very few--fewer than ten--e-mails in the past about this stock and few others, and anyone who paid attention to what we have said over the last two years has saved himself a little money, regardless of how his grammar or ego was affected. I have seen that claim over and over about "malicious sites"; it was once made about a link to the T. R. R. C., and once about a link to MarketWatch, so I take some of those complaints to be attempts by really desperate people to steer others away from useful information, and many of the others to be, simply, repeated misinformation. I think I've visited almost every site crow has linked to without any ill effects on either my computer or my sense of reason.
Thanks for the suggestions, anyway. Should I decide to take up paid bashing, they might be useful.
Cheers!
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
