It is unfortunate to watch people "eat their own" in the arena of debating the pros and cons of a stock. The SFMI highway is littered with current and former shareholders who were once respected by all for their opinions, due diligence, honesty, etc., as long as they owned shares and put forth a bullish outlook on the stock. However, once a person sells or starts questioning the company, or dares to point out something negative about the company, they become enemies of the state. I get it though...it is human nature.

The latest example of the "you're either with us or you're against us" mob mentality is apparent by Pic, and anyone agreeing with him, chiding Spiny, who has been the forum leader since its inception and by all counts has been an ardent SFMI bull with the foremost sense of objective reasoning on the board. And what was his crime?....answering a shareholder's question about what the negatives and positives were in the latest 10Q - which is a common question by shareholders in any stock, not just SFMI.

Pic, I don't see how you can call Spiny's post anything but objective, while you previously stated that you didn't even want to read the 10Q "because it makes (you) angry" and you "need to keep (yourself) on an even emotional keel". Those comments alone are the very definition of subjective reasoning, while Spiny's analysis of various points of the 10Q are examples of objective, fact-based reasoning:

• OBJECTIVE arguments are often those that have to do with logos, that is, reason, evidence and logic, generally dealing with material questions (things that can be sensed or measured and have to do with the real outside world, outside of oneself).

• SUBJECTIVE arguments are most often those dealing with the personal situation, feelings or experiences of a particular individual, family or group, and are usually arguments from ethos or pathos (though material subjective factors may involve arguments from logos as well).

http://utminers.utep.edu/omwilliamson/engl1312/subjective.htm

I personally would never discourage anyone from reading and analyzing any bit of information available which legitimately helps them form a greater understanding of the company and the issues and developments surrounding their investment. The corporate filings in particular should be weighted heavier than anything else a corporation releases to the public, because the company is legally accountable by the statements provided in those documents. This isn't I-Scum speak, it is common sense and due diligence and it is mind-boggling that a shareholder would avoid reading the 10Q because what he might read might hurt his eyes and perhaps challenge the illusory feel-good nature of the latest rumors...which coincidentally the company isn't accountable for and otherwise keeps any negative shareholder sentiment at bay.

While the rumors/developments of a new investor group may very well be true and be a positive development for SFMI shareholders, this expectation should not be used as a shroud to hide a year's worth of failures on the company's part at the expense of diluting the ownership of the very shareholders who have been supporting the stock. If I were any of the Quilliams, I would like nothing more than to have shareholders avoid reading the 10Ks and 10Qs so that I'd avoid any difficult questions and criticism at the upcoming shareholder's meeting. As such, I would encourage all SFMI shareholders to read the 10Q prior to the shareholders meeting to remind themselves of what the company has done, rather than promised, for the latest year, and hold management's feet to the fire. IMO, sticking your head in the sand is definitely NOT a successful or recommended investment strategy.

"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for men of good conscience to remain silent." - John F. Kennedy.