You've now had six (6) days to respond to my reply to the message of your post. No response....

So first, I suppose I should advise of my interpretation of the word "spineless" in the context of this message board. I would think that "spineless" would suggest someone who fires off an abusive post, containing erroneous info, then slithers away - avoiding a reply to the response to his message.

The inverse of "spineless" would be someone who actively responds to attacks, namecalling, lies and erroneous info. That would be me. The spineless one? Well, after six long days of opportunity avoided, that would be YOU.

And what you apparently miss in my communication (perhaps my fault for poor communication skills) is that unless the information shared at the shareholders meeting meet the requirements for reporting per SEC regs, disclosure at the meeting and only at the meeting is acceptable.

I provided an example that should have made the point extremely clear. At a shareholder's meeting I attended, the company in question advised that they were seeking venture capital to enable their acquisition of certain technology they considered essential. This was disclosed at the shareholders meeting ONLY. No PR, no SEC filing. Why? Because it wasn't reportable per SEC regs. The reportable event would have been if they had actually acquired that venture capital - and they never did.

Perhaps what I failed to say, because I thought it was incredibly obvious (through the example given if nothing else), is that nothing that was disclosed at the PTSC shareholder meeting beyond the financials, which were reported per SEC regs before the meeting, was worthy of reporting per SEC regs. Apparently this point was missed/not clarified throughout the entire prior discussion with Teremoto/LL.

Stating your future intent in relatively general terms is NOT a reportable event. Their intent to possibly buy back stock I believe had previously been reported. If they actually do issue dividends, they will have to report it when the event occurs. Bottom line, their intent regarding dividends is not reportable because such action is contingent on future revenues which are not assured. As for everything else I'm aware of that was disclosed in the meeting - it was virtually all "TBD", contingent on things not yet known.

So now, in your brilliance, please advise of the info disclosed at the meeting, or in Gloria's email, that was reportable per SEC regs. And perhaps Teremoto can chime in. Anyone for that matter. Identify that one bit of info that was reportable and not reported, and I will graciously apologize to the board for my error. That action, BTW, is something I KNOW never to expect from you when you are wrong. Why?

And to be abundantly clear, I do criticize the BoD for not making a transcript of the meeting available (including Q&A). They obviously didn't have to do it, but they should have done it. But I do appreciate the fact that the BoD openly acknowledged their errors (no excuses), and put forth an intent that appears to be consistent with the current wishes of shareholders (buy-backs, dividends, action on PDSG), and an intent to dedicate more resources, when they become available, to support greater activity at Alliacense toward maximizing return on the MMP.

FWIW,

SGE