Dan,
I guess my thoughts on Oilinbank go a lot further than “He’s gone”, though that plus the fact that FFF is gone ARE, as you say, significant in themselves.
The train runs like this :
If anyone sold their TRBY because of the postings on iHub and then the PR on de-listing, could they have a legal claim against Oily? It seems that Oily was right in the thick of getting TRBY de-listed, if I read correctly and connect the dots. And without doubt, he was at the center of publicizing that fact. I don’t even think Tom or anyone else knew of the delisting until a shareholder who read Oily’s post notified him. (Same or next day.) The fact that Oily posted the de-listing as NEWS to everyone is more than a little interesting, don’t you think? How does one GET news like that first, unless they create it, are watching for it, or are in cahoots with someone who is creating it?
Could Oily’s posting and mucking around in the GSA (Calling, complaining, manipulating TRBY’s de-listing) when in fact the Quill AND the SW was compliant all the time, AND mice were clearly covered as 508-compliant input devices … start an SEC inquiry into stock manipulation? It seems to me there is ample justification & evidence for such an inquiry. (There is a funny smell to all of this, and the more you look at what happened, the worse it reeks. I’m sure it wouldn’t take the SEC folks too long to pick up the trail …)
The evidence of the Serial # Oily provided is damnning at least. At best, it leads whomever might be investigating this right to his doorstep, and is solid evidence. I would not doubt that there is much more evidence that can be collected along the way. You don’t simply call up, email, or fax the GSA to get a competitor de-listed without leaving any footprints. There must be call records, someone who can ID you by name that you spoke with, or received your fax, etc. (Most every fax has the originating # on it somewhere …) Email is highly traceable, like it or not.
Could a stockholder that sold as a result of Oily’s posting sue the government? They have a material loss if they did. The GSA, it seems, went along with whomever started this whole thing, and delisted TRBY without any prior notification. Seems to me they may have exposed themselves to some liability there as well.
Oh, one more thought … the Section 508 statuates clearly spell out that any govt employee can sue the govt for not making 508 compliant products available to them, if they are in fact available. The upshot is that by delisting the Quill, some people may have denied access to 508-compliant technology, technology that was formerly listed on their own website for 18 months.
No I don’t work for the govt, and I am not planning a suit, but there certainly seems to be a few open doors here. Not sure if Oily realized fully what he was stepping into ….
Dave
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
