Did you actually read what Judge Stephens told Huf
Post# of 7795
The first sentence sounds like me, but I know how to spell too, unlike the author. See the third sentence I edited in red.
Quote:
Our Constitution guarantees us free speech and we have always valued the lessons gleaned from dissent. When does dissent cross over that imaginary line and become "Bashing"? To(o) often we find well grounded dissent capriciously labeled as "Bashing" by over zealous investors bent on protecting a stocks reputation at any cost. The "Bashing" that is addressed on this site is quite different from dissent. The Anatomy of a Basher strives to look at the calculated erosion of confidence in a given stock. Erosion by means that are, in every sense, void of truth, hinged on deception and innuendo, and motivated by greed at the expense of others. This compendium is offered to aid in identifying the telltale signs of "Bashing", and hopefully provide a counter balance to this heretofore unchecked manipulation of investors fears for personal gain.
As Judge Stephens told Huffy, and I blogged about a year or so ago, if someone puts out something that's false, it, by definition can be shown to be false, and the market will correct itself.
There's a reason the stock price is where it's at. It's not because some bogey man created in your mind by Kyle Kennedy.
The Judge told Kyle all those that sold will need to testify why they didn't buy and drive the stock price back up when they (ahem) realized the Defendant posted something that was false.
SFRX targets novices, as does the handbook. It's designed to attract marks.
Just sayin'