Please read the whole chain. My original message at bottom, Rons reply, and my brief summary of thoughts. Just thinking out loud about less expensive alternatives to correcting BOD issues. It is a shame that things erroded to this degree, but it is also a shame that more transparancy wasn't provided by TPL, or PTSC which could have avoided the degrading of confidence in their abilities and motives.

Ron,

Thank you for your reply.

Seems that most are somewhat disenchanted with the BOD and are trying to determine ways to make changes. My suggestion would be to contact Mr. Moore who has already started proceedings against TPL for an accounting of funds. Seems that we may have the same problems and therefore a more economical solution may be to contact Mr. Moore, contribute to his expenses, and in return be made privy to what is discovered in his proceedings. There is a possibility that if funds were charged erroneously by TPL it could lead to misconduct, or incompetance by our BOD.

PDS, TPL and PTSC are all intermingled and if one party is a victim of misconduct then more than likely so is another. Our BOD seemingly has made no public contact, efforts, or acknowledged Mr. Moores concerns. Nor have they expressed any concerns to shareholders in this matter. Makes you wonder.

P.S. I don't own a significant amount of shares.

--- In patriot_scientific@yahoogroups.com, "ronr5598" <ronr5598@...> wrote:
>
> CCom:
>
> Arbitration isn't used very much in my area, so I'm no expert concerning such --- however arb proceedings are, generally speaking, private in nature, as are mediations, and I'm not aware that even the ruling from the arbitrator is published anywhere. As a result, unless there are some guidelines in those published by the AAA (American Arbitration Association) of which I am unaware, third parties are not entitled to such information.
>
> Having said the above, there is no reason, absent a confidentiality clause (CC), for example, why the parties themselves could not voluntarily share this information with others. Such clauses are standard in mediation, because the parties must be free to disclose as much information as possible with the freedom of knowing that it will not be used against them later if the case goes to trial. In an arbitration, however, the hearing that results in a ruling IS, in effect, the trial --- therefore, absent a CC, or some other reason (proprietary info, etc.), there would seem to be no reason to restrict the parties in making such disclosures.
>
> Hope this helps. Best wishes.
>
> --- In patriot_scientific@yahoogroups.com, "centurycom" <centurycom@> wrote:
> >
> > Moore's arbitration hearing will be dealing with the same defendant (TPL), and the same issues, accounting of expenses, as are also our concerns. My question is this, during the hearing any evidence, or discrepancies discovered which would be relevent to, or pertaining to us, would that be made available to us? Is there any obligation by the arbirtator to disclose fraudulent activity concerning third parties who did not request that arbitration proceeding? As would, or could be our case. Very well could explain why we are not persuing an accounting at this time. Though I am least concerned with the latter.
> >
> > Sorry if this was addressed before. I have not noticed it. Could be very interesting, and enlightening developments for our part, or maybe not.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
>