> I didn't bother replying to Craig's pandering on list because I > didn't want to embarrass you further.
That's strange, I never saw you forego an opportunity to embarrass on this list... It appears to me that you were embarrassed that JPM was not nominated as hero of the e-gold list. But, don't worry, I don't take trophees so you can have it. > I'm sorry if your father is a moron or has other character flaws, or > you had other childhood problems. Trying to be friends? > You are simply a rumour mongerer. Not much more or less. > > In every email you hint that TGC (or indeed me, or others) is a scam. Is this what you have problems with: "an investment with this many risks (unknown address, unknown managers, unknown size of the business, unknown profits, unknown growth rate, unverifiable number of shares they issue, ...)" EOQ Now, this are simply 'facts', not rumours. If you can find any of this unknown information you are welcome to bring it. Stating what is 'unknown' in this share offer is not spreading a rumour... > > You won't come out and STATE that that is your opinion, but you > repeat endlessly that it could be the case, you've heard it is the > case, it could well be the case. I have never said something like: 'I have heard it is the case...' I have repeatedly said 'what COULD be the case' That is just a normal logic process of considering the different possibilities and trying to eliminate some of them. Unfortunately we have so little information about TGC and DBourse that very few (if any) possibilities can be eliminated. This is just a procedure of trying to do due dilligence on it. Has nothing to do with spreading rumours. In fact I can accuse you of spreading rumours, because you are continuously touting what a succes TGC and DBourse is. Now, if you have only the evidence that we have , then you are spreading rumours (positive ones in this case) for which no proof is available, at least not to the public investors. I am wording myself with 'could be...'. That is not spreading rumours, that is talking about possibilities. You are making unfounded statements (= rumours) So before you accuse me of being a rumour mongerer, here are some of your recent statements: "> These are GOOD THINGS -- likely why the share issue has been such a > runaway success. ... > IT IS A FLABBERGASTING SUCCESS. The first laissze faire > unregistered! unlicensed! unregulated! share issue has happened - and > look at the figures." EOQ So, I'll repeat my question. What evidence you have for these rumours (even in capital letters..).? What reliable figures have you seen? > (Even after reading this email, you still won't simply state that > that is your belief.) I never 'believe' anything, so why I should state that I believe TGC is scam if I don't know it and have no evidence for it? I simply 'don't know' , that's what I have been saying all the time. I 'don't know' and we are discussing what TGC and DBourse 'could be' Why do you have so much problem with that? > > Now come the ad homemein attacks (in a round-about manner, of course). That was just a strategy to have you come out. By telling my father that he would suddenly turn 180 degrees and agree with me, he always did exactly the opposite and came out with all the arguments he could find. Then the matter could be really settled. But it worked only a few times because he learned the lesson and stopped going too far into argument altogether. I figured it would work the same with you , and I was lucky. > > Your "point" devolved from wanting regulation, to self-regulation, to > your type of self regulation, to RJR being a better investment than > TGC. You were continuously running away into the regulation topic, so I just followed you there. And I did not say that RJR is a better investment than TGC. I just stated that RJR gives 10% annual dividend and asked the question why one should invest in risky TGC shares that give only 7.2% People can look up the numbers for RJR themselves and make their own decision which investment is better. > The notion that "TGC shares are crap because there is not enough > information" is an ordinary idea expressed loudly by many. TGC shares are closest to junk bonds, when we try to classify them. With junk bonds also your principal is at risk. With TGC a little more so, because we can't even figure out where the principal is being held. Junk bonds are also considered crap by many, but they usually give 10 - 15% annual returns, so that helps a little. Cheers Danny --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Use e-gold's Secure Randomized Keyboard (SRK) when accessing your e-gold account(s) via the web and shopping cart interfaces to help thwart keystroke loggers and common viruses.
