So hoov's posts have been removed. I suppose that is fair, since an agreement was reached concerning his posting here. But I question the mindset that would see serious posts about ZEN being removed, posts that were never shown to be false, posts that were civil, and posts that present a side of the situation that nobody else seems to care to put forth.

And while these posts are gone, Fluffy's post that says "Boys and Girls. If Zen can utilize the tailings from the Albany site for the cement industry we should all be extremelly excited about it. If this proves up, the removal of the overburden becomes a net financial benifit to shareholders. This is very significant. Cheers, Fluffy the Cat.  "  remains, a post that is plain and simply wrong. This post has 5 recommendations, showing it is having an impact on its readers.

If a company wishes to pay for a site on social media, I suppose that is its right, although ZEN's doing so has elicited some responses questioning the need. This was ZEN's chance to use this site for the edification of its readers. When a post is listed that the company doesn't like, post in turn refuting the statement. Show the errors made, and correct them, for the benefit of all readers. Don't just remove it.

Similarly, when a post is known to be inaccurate, acknowledge that error and correct it. Then remove the erroneous post so it cannot influence anybody's views on the subject.

ZEN is paying, in shares, for the control of this hub. Since that arrangement was announced, I don't think there has been any change in the content here. That is disappointing.