Yes to get it expanded to other districts. I would think that the decision will be appealed under free speech. False claims damaging a company (not a person) such as DGRI are always subject to litigation but not under defamation of character which pertains to a person. They would fall under libel and slandereous comments instead. Companies have brought such suits against bloggers and won. However, it is generally not worth the time and expense of the lawsuit. For example, if a company is truly outstanding, it wouldn't matter much what a few people said on the Internet. Good performance trumps a few bad comments.
Companies that have an relatively unblemished record are outstanding. Companies that perform for their investors are rewarded. Those that don't get punished with reduced PPS. Thus, the bloggers are relatively unimportant in the longer run. What a company does is what really matters.
For example, had DGRI kept its emphasis on Basin Gulch, its PPS might have been significantly higher. Scattering its efforts and limited funds don't seem to have been positive developments.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
