Replies to post #1055 on The Question and Answer Board (IHUB)

[Was (Bob)]

"I DO NOT HAVE an offshore bank account"

Yes, I saw that post earlier today. While I know nothing about the validity of the contents, I was quite impressed with the way it was written. No-nonsense refutation without attacking.

I believe that there should now be NO argument that the public statement of the concerned party, McBride, has a LOT
MORE weight than that of his DEFAMER, whose post should be construed as:

Incorrect.

What we have here is two people making contradictory statements. It's for the reader to decide for him/herself which is more credible and act accordingly. It's not for you to determine that one is more credible than the other and therefore the only one fit for public consumption.

That one of the people involved is a former officer of the company has absolutely no relevance from an administrative perspective.

The boards are for sharing of opinions and information for the benefit of all who read them. The role of the chairmen, directors, and myself is to keep the threads clear of things like personal attacks, vulgarity, threats, and spam. Not to "filter" the information being presented.

AND DELETED HENCEFORTH....

which I have done AGAIN..... Hopefully for the last time...

That was not a particularly good move.

[Mark Marcellus]

+ Libel...

+ Personal Attack...

+ A Blatant LIE...

+ Re-post of a post already DELETED...

AND DELETED HENCEFORTH....

which I have done AGAIN..... Hopefully for the last time...

I was going to follow Mark Twain's advice and let this drop but...

Spin it any way you want Francois, it still seems obvious to me that the bias of the poster is the driving issue on your deletions. You can call Schoffer's post a side issue, but the fact is that he was saying that the SEC had determined a group of people had broken the law and had shared this non public information with him. Given that you seemed to disbelieve Schoffer's claim, how is it that you don't consider it 1) Libel 2) a personal attack on the shorters, and 3) a blatant lie? The only reason I can see is that you're reluctant to delete anything which slings mud at shorters, no matter how outlandish.

FWIW, I share your hope that this is the last time you'll be deleting that post. I'd even wager a small amount of money that it will indeed be the last time. <g>