closing on a high of $2.58 (+18), page-5

re: stolwyk represents most?? Your right Olive this is not a thread and it is just a subject headline with no detail or substantial comment. Sorry for clogging up the CST board with this. It would be a shame if newer investers only went to the mentioned post and bypassed the significant discussions on CST both pro and con which represent many posters views and give a more rounded overview of CST rather than selected positive announcements only.

"I have explained a few times why a Study thread is being used and I am not going to repeat it."

It didn't make sense then and it still doesn't and wasn't it your duplication of posts and editing out of context that the prior discussion was about.

"You made a big issue of it some time ago when you referred to ramping. The complete thread was deleted so I hoped you had learnt a lesson."

The issue brought up by me was in reference to informatrion that you refused to justify or substantiate about having had contact with CST. The thread was not deleted for anything I wrote and I didn't request it's deletion- please use facts rather than throw around unfounded dribble. A range of threads you posted in were deleted. There was no lesson to be learnt by me.

"For starters, it is not necessarily for posters. There are other reasons but I don't want to get into another fight by explaining these items which most understand."

The above doesn't make sense. You refer to "most" but I think you are greatly overstating your self importance and knowledge of numbers on HC who find these "personal filing cabinets" posts useful.

"Most" could best be used for those couldn't be bothered to object or comment on posts like yours and the subsequent aggressive responses that never answer or explain the points outlined and try and attack the credability of the poster.

"I am going to disregard your advice and will carry on regardless.

You wrote: "End of thread I hope"

You may want to know that I have the right of reply; it is called evenhanded treatment. You apparently don't support that idea.

Of course I don't have to reply but I did decide to because the issue has been referred to before.

Now, let us see if the 1 for 1 post can stick by using your comment: "End of thread I hope".

Gerry"

If you only posted real facts not the implied slander you would have had the final post as you always like to do.
You would hardly expect me to give up my rights of reply.