It's amazing how you can hurl numerous insults and yet still claim that my post that had no insults was attacking you. I'm simply calling you out. If you can't take it, don't read my posts.

From a man that has pulled out over $400,000 from this stock in dividends and stock sales

Not that my profits/losses are any of your business, but that figure is way too high.

You sold 200,000 shares when the price was around $2 per share. In addition you should have received at least around $100,000 in dividends. If anything I think my numbers are too low.

...yet you are still here.

Yes, I am, even though I don't need to be. I offer explanation of legal concepts at no charge, and, whether you believe it or not, I do so as a service to others. Sorry you have a problem with that, but it is additional evidence of your obvious hatred.

You own hatred seems to have clouded your judgement, as anyone reading what I wrote would have understood "yet you are still here" as meaning you still own the stock, not a comment on your still posting on Agora. Look at the context in which I made that statement, i.e. your statement about people having reason to sell and invest elsewhere.

As to your other comments - I didn't ask for guarantees. I simply asked you to spell out what you thought were actionable items. Because for all of your posting about what is acceptable on this forum, you know, "facts, knowledgable opinion, etc" it seems we never get all of the facts. we get bitching and moaning and allegations and inuendo, but never any actual discussion about what can actually be done about them. You're a very intelligent lawyer. So when someone posts that we should hire a lawyer to sue PTSC, or represent us in some action regarding PTSC, I would expect that you could comment on where in fact you think someone may have broken the law, or shirked their fiduciary responsibility, etc. And then take it a step further and comment on how likely you think bringing an action regarding fiduciary responsibilty would be. You know, actually use your legal knowledge and say "I've done a little research and from what I see about XX % of fiduciary responsibilty cases are resolved in favor of the complainant." You know, something of that nature. As do you think that information is irrelevant? becuase it sures seems like it SHOULD BE relevant. You see Ron, sometimes it's not what you say, it's what you don't say that is even more meaningful. Which is why your "facts, etc" is allowed is a bunch of bull. I'ts simply lying by omission. Because for every post bashing the BOD or bitching and moaning about this or that, there's still the fact that, if in fact that poster is a shareholder, they must think that the likelihood of the shareprice going up is at least 50% or greater. Otherwise, why wouldn't they do exactly as you've stated - sell and invest elsewhere. But we never see the posts stating why they think the shareprice will go up. We never even see the posts stating that they do think it will go up. Lying by omission. Unless, of course, we have the absolute dumbest investors known to mankind. Becuase that is the only explanation I can come up with on why an investor would hold a stock that he thinks is going nowhere but down.