Replies to post #2333 on Investing in Timber

[schaef]

David does seem to have a point there, dupedbysteve.

He has provided his real name, we have independent verification of who he is, and we know that he has purchased some trees - even the number, species, year and what they cost him.

That about sums up all the information we might need as proof of identity and having a stake in this game.

Can you explain what information you are talking about that David is asking for from others that he hasn't been willing to give? Or are you just spewing some meaningless nonsense?

Everyone is welcome to have an opinion, even non-TATF clients, and anyone can post here. I don't have the power to limit this discussion to TATF clients and wouldn't if I could.

Both dupedbysteve and belmontx indicate that they are former tree owners and don't currently have money on the table. Meanwhile, they scoff at the idea that discussions on this board can affect our financial interests. Well, that is true in their case. I understand that your sense of morality has been offended by your perception of the way that TATF does business. But I still have a financial stake here, I'm not ready to burn down the building and lynch the owners as you seem to be. Fun as that might be for those with offended senses of morality, it doesn't do a thing for the health of my investment.

dupedbysteve, I guess the non-disclosure agreement or "talk nice" agreement that we perceived you might be under after you indicated you had made a deal with Steve is now over?

[dupedbysteve]

We have no evidence other than a sale,and i have long harbored the idea you are a schill for TATF. Actually it was justcfrall who gave me the right means to get out of TATF by his statement of seeking legal redress. As we know justcfrall had an agreement from TATF to rebuy his investment that TATF reneged on. I refused to stop my legal means until i had cash in hand.

David You have a propensity to attack anyone who would denegrate TATF even though TATF has shown no willingness to commit to even informing investors in their plantation of the state of any trees. You repeatedly attacked me for harming TATF as I went about getting CR authorities to examine TATF.

I will let Ihub examine all my writings and i know my writings have been above board, i would say yours are dubious at the best in several instances.

[dupedbysteve]

>>"Once again, dupedbysteve, you have made a slanderous statement. You accuse me of possibly working in collusion with the Brunners to steal money from tree investors. Slander is against the law, and you have just broken it, again."<<

David: Slander is a spoken statement.
I have no indication that you are not a shill for the brunners and since you popped up on here as a satisfied TATF owner in the midst of a group of owners who at the time were discussing joint collective legal action against the brunners i believe you are.
Every time now that legal action is addressed you pull out the legal,We believe,parts of the brunners legal contract. well David, Lawyers have ways to dispute such language when it is in ponzi schemes.