As expected, the more critical posts under Dalton
Post# of 88046
(Total Views: 575)
Posted On: 09/01/2025 2:27:41 PM
As expected, the more critical posts under Dalton’s latest update have already been deleted. Honestly, I’m surprised they were visible as long as they were before disappearing. But this has become the pattern: any tough questions or scrutiny don’t survive very long, while the comments that remain are all the predictable “thank you Doc” and “can’t wait!” replies.
That may help maintain a certain image, but it doesn’t build confidence. Deleting scrutiny is not the same as addressing it. Shareholders aren’t asking for inside info, but for transparency, communication, and accountability. When those kinds of posts vanish, it just reinforces the sense that tough questions aren’t welcome — and that damages trust.
It also creates an echo chamber effect. Every time comments critical of the lack of filings or concrete updates disappear, what’s left is just a wall of cheerleading. That might look good on the surface, but it means the conversation never gets beyond recycled optimism. And in the end, it doesn’t help anyone, because all of us — long-term holders especially — need substance more than motivational slogans.
If UNVC really is on the verge of major moves, there’s no reason to fear open discussion. In fact, transparency and tolerance for scrutiny would do far more to strengthen shareholder confidence than curating away anything that isn’t 100% praise. We’ve been patient for years, but patience doesn’t mean blind acceptance. Constructive criticism is part of accountability, and it’s part of being a public company.
So yes, the deletions don’t surprise me. But what would surprise me — and what would really move the needle — is a willingness to let scrutiny stand, and to respond with facts instead of edits. That’s the transparency that will make believers out of skeptics, and it’s what the shareholder base truly deserves.
That may help maintain a certain image, but it doesn’t build confidence. Deleting scrutiny is not the same as addressing it. Shareholders aren’t asking for inside info, but for transparency, communication, and accountability. When those kinds of posts vanish, it just reinforces the sense that tough questions aren’t welcome — and that damages trust.
It also creates an echo chamber effect. Every time comments critical of the lack of filings or concrete updates disappear, what’s left is just a wall of cheerleading. That might look good on the surface, but it means the conversation never gets beyond recycled optimism. And in the end, it doesn’t help anyone, because all of us — long-term holders especially — need substance more than motivational slogans.
If UNVC really is on the verge of major moves, there’s no reason to fear open discussion. In fact, transparency and tolerance for scrutiny would do far more to strengthen shareholder confidence than curating away anything that isn’t 100% praise. We’ve been patient for years, but patience doesn’t mean blind acceptance. Constructive criticism is part of accountability, and it’s part of being a public company.
So yes, the deletions don’t surprise me. But what would surprise me — and what would really move the needle — is a willingness to let scrutiny stand, and to respond with facts instead of edits. That’s the transparency that will make believers out of skeptics, and it’s what the shareholder base truly deserves.
(4)
(0)