"but, you still cant let it go"

Let's get the facts straight now, lol. gcduck is the one the posted the information that PTSC did this, not me. I simply commented that this is yet another instance where the PTSC BOD & Management team doled out what are precious, and limited, PTSC treasury dollars to help get rid of a problem that with proper foresight and oversight by them might never have occured in the first place.

gcduck then took issue that what I wrote and what was in the 10q, trying to say it was somehow NOT true, so I simply corrected his mistake.

Opty, in typical fashion, then tried to excuse the unfortunate reality by downplaying it. applying, logic that in fact instead supports why PTSC never should have had to do it.

Now you keep the issue, that you are allegedley trying to downplay, alive by trying to use a relativism argument. All well and good. But:

Those are the facts. And theses instances of PTSC BOD poor stewardship of our treasry dollars continue to occur exactly because we as shareholders have continuously "let it go". As I say, things are the same until they're different.

Was it really necessary for PTSC to have agreed to pay up to $500K to Chuck Moore rather than to simply arrange instead for that $500K to simply have come from TPL or Alliacense, the actual debtor? Afterall, the logic behind the settlement is that it frees up the road to again begin collecting MMP licensing revenues. Obviously it was not necessary, except that our BOD is weak, and TPL has power over our BOD that PTSC shareholders should have but instead have willingly abdicated. In large part, arguably because of attitudes expressed in your post, opty's post and gcduck's post.