The reverse also holds true.

WTF? You demand fact and sources from the accusers but those providing connected info don't have to?

How does the demand from posters who post what their told for facts and names and accusations about people making money off posts not need the same level of scrutiny. It should work both ways for anyone asking for names and facts.

You are correct the VZ factor was overlooked badly. I know I did because I believed we had a valid enforceable contract to fall back on. That may prove to be worthless but from what was listed in the court documents it appears that the current noteholders also place a pretty high value on the arbitration since they want it.

I don't put any stock in information unless I have the same thing from people I talk to. There is a big difference between inside information and information that is available for the asking. I certainly haven't said I have inside information. I have declined to post where some of my information has come from which is my right.

Can you point out anything in Fung's affidavit that contradicts what he has said publicly? Is there anything that supports the concept that people posted information for gain here on the board? I'm not even looking for facts. Just give me what you get out of the affidavit.

You may be right about how the board has morphed to a certain extent but that doesn't mean it doesn't provide information to those who ask as well as those who don't. I wouldn't have read the affidavit without beandog posting it here.

I didn't ask for it but I am glad I saw it.

JJ