I am sick of talking about Brian but I can not help but respond to this post. How about responses from any of the Brian die-hards to these questions:

1. Why couldnt Brian be a shareholder rep and post on Agora - where is the problem with that? Not only do I not see a problem it would seem to be the point.

2. Why couldnt Brian or PTSC tell us shareholders who obviously valued his opinion and looked forward to hearing from him "Hey shareholders, sorry but because of my appointment as shareholder rep I will not be able to post on Agora. The company thinks it conflicts with my position as shareholder rep (for some unknown reason) and I just wanted you all to know why you will not be hearing from me."?

3. If our shareholder rep was for some reason prevented from communicating with the group he was appointed to represent, then how do you explain why he did communicate once in awhile - still with no explanation as to why it was so limited? And how do you explain his recent round of posts (before he resigned) if he was somehow restricted from communicating?

4. Why did he bail and leave his devoted followers twisting in the wind, fighting his fight for him on Agora without offering a word of explanation? Maybe he didnt care about defending himself but couldnt he help out his supporters? What about after he resigned?

5. Why could he not at an absolute minimum explain why we had heard so little from him over the last couple of years or explain what was his role as shareholder rep? Whatever the problem was - give the common courtesy to all those who supported you or a simple explanation. Was the PTSC shareholder rep position some matter of national security that can not even be mentioned by anybody or risk being put to death?

Give me a break already on this guy. He may be the greatest guy and most omnipotent investor but he made a decision to bail and not offer a word of explanation. So why the fanatic following?