|
Post by deltadon30228 on Aug 22, 2010 14:33:19 GMT -5
Do you think all MM's/Brokers settled their cert issues at the same time? I'll answer that for you, NO! Most got their certs out and covered during the 2004-2006 time frame. That post is trying to create doubt and you know it. Don, IMHO! So, who handled it after Maheu died Aug 4, 2008? As far as "creating doubt" my Grandmother, may she rest in peace, told me that dinasaur bones were put on Earth by the Devil to create doubt. Sometimes things are what they are. This post is factual as far as what has been said and done. View it objectively, and base an opinion on the facts provided. What does it tell you? If all you see is an attempt to create doubt, then you obviously cannot accept the facts provided (IMO). I will respect that. Your taking this as I'm saying your trying to create doubt, I'm not, I'm saying box o rocks is, without doing total DD from both sides first. If he doesn't know and is asking, he should put it in a question form, not a factual form. I'm saying this post can be misleading by how it's posted. Your taking it personal, my pointing you out was that your bringing it over as factual and it's not being represented properly. You have to understand you have been nothing but negative for quite a while, that is WHY I pointed you out on this issue. If the hat fits, wear it proudly. And as far as who handled it after Maheu, what does that have to do with anything? The deal was already done by the time of his death. Maybe the deal allowed certain brokers or MM's to cover certs by a certain date, I don't know, I wasn't at the meeting. Quit trying to confuse this even more. I'm done responding to you on this issue. Easy killer! Don, IMHO!
|
|
|
Post by goodolboy on Aug 22, 2010 15:22:58 GMT -5
So, who handled it after Maheu died Aug 4, 2008? As far as "creating doubt" my Grandmother, may she rest in peace, told me that dinasaur bones were put on Earth by the Devil to create doubt. Sometimes things are what they are. This post is factual as far as what has been said and done. View it objectively, and base an opinion on the facts provided. What does it tell you? If all you see is an attempt to create doubt, then you obviously cannot accept the facts provided (IMO). I will respect that. Your taking this as I'm saying your trying to create doubt, I'm not, I'm saying box o rocks is, without doing total DD from both sides first. If he doesn't know and is asking, he should put it in a question form, not a factual form. I'm saying this post can be misleading by how it's posted. Your taking it personal, my pointing you out was that your bringing it over as factual and it's not being represented properly. You have to understand you have been nothing but negative for quite a while, that is WHY I pointed you out on this issue. If the hat fits, wear it proudly. And as far as who handled it after Maheu, what does that have to do with anything? The deal was already done by the time of his death. Maybe the deal allowed certain brokers or MM's to cover certs by a certain date, I don't know, I wasn't at the meeting. Quit trying to confuse this even more. I'm done responding to you on this issue. Easy killer! Don, IMHO! Don, how about we just clear the air here. 1) Simply because I require verifiable evidence to throw my support behind something only makes me appear negative to those that choose to accept things on faith. I am far from being negative where CMKX is concerned, but my approach is lost on those that continue believe I am simply negative IMO. 2) I did not take it personally at all, and knew quite well that you were referring to the original post/poster. My comments were based on your opinion of his post, and your suggestion that it was created to cause doubt, and I respectfully disagree with your assessment. Simple as that.
|
|
|
Post by deltadon30228 on Aug 22, 2010 16:22:26 GMT -5
Your taking this as I'm saying your trying to create doubt, I'm not, I'm saying box o rocks is, without doing total DD from both sides first. If he doesn't know and is asking, he should put it in a question form, not a factual form. I'm saying this post can be misleading by how it's posted. Your taking it personal, my pointing you out was that your bringing it over as factual and it's not being represented properly. You have to understand you have been nothing but negative for quite a while, that is WHY I pointed you out on this issue. If the hat fits, wear it proudly. And as far as who handled it after Maheu, what does that have to do with anything? The deal was already done by the time of his death. Maybe the deal allowed certain brokers or MM's to cover certs by a certain date, I don't know, I wasn't at the meeting. Quit trying to confuse this even more. I'm done responding to you on this issue. Easy killer! Don, IMHO! Don, how about we just clear the air here. 1) Simply because I require verifiable evidence to throw my support behind something only makes me appear negative to those that choose to accept things on faith. I am far from being negative where CMKX is concerned, but my approach is lost on those that continue believe I am simply negative IMO. 2) I did not take it personally at all, and knew quite well that you were referring to the original post/poster. My comments were based on your opinion of his post, and your suggestion that it was created to cause doubt, and I respectfully disagree with your assessment. Simple as that. I should aplologize then, my intentions are totally good and I shouldn't have approached this the way I did but when your (mine) DD leads you to where your comfortable with how things are going as far as confidence in a payout, you then defend the plan. I have been doing DD for nearly 9 years now and have talked with some very knowledgeable and insightful people that have led me to my place of peace. I'm not saying you have to be where I am, I just try to keep everyone calm with knowing in my mind WE WILL BE PAID, no one knows the exact date but the inner circle and I don't include the plaintiffs in the inner circle. Not to discredit any of them but they are the closest to AL as we have right now, along with Saltydogs and Bholleneggs posts and behavior as plaintiffs and matching that up with MY DD gives me peace. Not to say that's all that brings me to that peace but if a posters DD fits into my DD and makes sense then yes I'm going to listen to what they have to say. Now, this is why I'm so against negative posts because they don't match all the DD in 9 years. Some haven't been doing their DD for whatever reasons and they want answers, instead of repeating 9 years of DD that would take a year in itself, I just try to keep those calm and put most of my posts into a question form so they can decide if it fits into their collective DD. I've never tried to tell anyone that I'm completely right and they are wrong, but I do defend against anyone trying to lead shareholders way off course and confuse, as you well know their are those who do just that, not saying you are one of them but you have to admit there is some that do. We are good and I hope there is no hard feelings, that is definitely not what I'm aiming for. Don, IMHO!
|
|
|
Post by goodolboy on Aug 23, 2010 8:08:45 GMT -5
Don, how about we just clear the air here. 1) Simply because I require verifiable evidence to throw my support behind something only makes me appear negative to those that choose to accept things on faith. I am far from being negative where CMKX is concerned, but my approach is lost on those that continue believe I am simply negative IMO. 2) I did not take it personally at all, and knew quite well that you were referring to the original post/poster. My comments were based on your opinion of his post, and your suggestion that it was created to cause doubt, and I respectfully disagree with your assessment. Simple as that. I should aplologize then, my intentions are totally good and I shouldn't have approached this the way I did but when your (mine) DD leads you to where your comfortable with how things are going as far as confidence in a payout, you then defend the plan. I have been doing DD for nearly 9 years now and have talked with some very knowledgeable and insightful people that have led me to my place of peace. I'm not saying you have to be where I am, I just try to keep everyone calm with knowing in my mind WE WILL BE PAID, no one knows the exact date but the inner circle and I don't include the plaintiffs in the inner circle. Not to discredit any of them but they are the closest to AL as we have right now, along with Saltydogs and Bholleneggs posts and behavior as plaintiffs and matching that up with MY DD gives me peace. Not to say that's all that brings me to that peace but if a posters DD fits into my DD and makes sense then yes I'm going to listen to what they have to say. Now, this is why I'm so against negative posts because they don't match all the DD in 9 years. Some haven't been doing their DD for whatever reasons and they want answers, instead of repeating 9 years of DD that would take a year in itself, I just try to keep those calm and put most of my posts into a question form so they can decide if it fits into their collective DD. I've never tried to tell anyone that I'm completely right and they are wrong, but I do defend against anyone trying to lead shareholders way off course and confuse, as you well know their are those who do just that, not saying you are one of them but you have to admit there is some that do. We are good and I hope there is no hard feelings, that is definitely not what I'm aiming for. Don, IMHO! No need to apologize. I'm just glad our discussion didn't decay into another useless pissing match as so many of these opposing views tend to do.
|
|
|
Post by Ed Jagacki on Aug 31, 2010 23:03:54 GMT -5
Hey Joe!
You posted into a thread that was inactive for more than a week, just to say that?!
You're quite the little troublemaker, aren't you?
|
|
|
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on Sept 1, 2010 9:15:41 GMT -5
Ed, Just so members don't think you are talking to yourself.... Just wanted to say that I deleted Joe's$$$$$$ post.
and yes that was the action of a troublmaker..... quite while your ahead Joe$$$$$
SINGLE
|
|