My thesis is about non share holders ...., page-8

Rather than mod the thread, here is HC's take on the issue.

A couple of years ago nine lives wrote the definitive essay for some of you guys. Ironically it was originally posted on TON; which means that one or two parts are specific to that, now deceased, company. Here it is in its entirety:

"Time for a friendly mod chat. Someone has written to admin complaining about "downrampers" and non-holders. First up I see that there was (now past tense) a thread specifically started to attack non holders and negative posters. According to our posting guidelines that is not on....

There is an urban myth that seems to have taken hold in HC. It would seem that many posters believe that share holders or posters with a positive outlook on a stock have special posting privileges over non-holders and naysayers. This is not true. Positive and negative posters, holders and non-holders alike have equal posting rights on HC. HC is about robust debate. It is not a mutual admiration society where lovers of any particular stock can get together and share their feeling over a hot cuppa. If this was the case then HC would run the risk of becoming a boiler room where unscrupulous uprampers could talk up every dog stock and then dump their shares onto unsuspecting newbies. Instead what we aim for is balanced debate where all the pros and cons can be thrashed out and hopefully contributors and readers can then make a better assessment in regards to risk and valuation. Remember, at this end of the market there is no such thing as a sure thing. Promising companies can and do go pear shaped.

I have looked through the names of posters on this forum and I can assure you that at least a couple of the negative posters are well respected HC members with industry experience. This does not mean that they are right but a wise holder would at least take their views on board even if you were to be in disagreement.

So what courses of action are open to holders?? Well, there is always the ignore button. If you feel that a particular poster's views are not even worth considering then you may find it very liberating to eliminate them from sight. Other than that you should address their arguments about the stock with good solid positive facts. Nothing looks quite so desperate and unconvincing as a personal attack in response to a well constructed post about the possible pitfalls. You will do yourself and your stock a great service if you can rip the arguments of the naysayers to pieces with good solid facts whilst maintaining a standard of personal respect for your opponent.

Please note that this is instruction on how the forum should run and it is not subject to debate so I will be immediately be locking this thread."

Here endeth the lesson. Thanks for your time, and the thread is locked.