That's exactly what you are doing by doing it in the second post. It's like negative marketing, where you say yes, by not saying no. Reminds me of the old joke where a guy writes on the birthday card, "I would have included money, but I had already sealed the card"

So what exactly were you not talking about then?

"My comment was "You will note that I didn't make any reference to the helicopter - mining companies with less to show than ISM have had company officials ride around in helicopters, or fall out of them" If you would read what was said it was a statement that I did not make any reference to the helicopter, as lesser companies than ISM have used them. You're so damned sensitive about any comment about your company, you infer slurs that weren't made."

How about we go with the original post:

"You will note that I didn't make any reference to the helicopter - mining companies with less to show than ISM have had company officials ride around in helicopters, or fall out of them"

Plain and simple this is what you wrote, want to dispute that? Obviously it takes on some sort of inference or purpose as you downplay and belittle the company's latest investor awareness brochure. What is the intent?

In your mind Liberty, what exactly are you trying to say?

As for Cad saying, "Oh well I guess thats what happens when you flog wallpaper on the innocent"

I would hope and assume that is his opinion. It would likely go without saying that generally most posts here are made as opinion. It is strongly opinionated. Does it break the rules. Who knows?

How about if I wrote one day on my own ISM forum that I was not happy about my ISM share performance, "Today it may as well be wallpaper". Is that over the top?

I do like to think that most who post here and especially the regular contributors are of a common mold. I like to think that most of the guys want to stay out of the mud. Read what Beer said when speaking about Quagmires posts last night. We don't have an issue with LBE, most seem to have a bad memory of a poster named Millright aka Liberty, who trys to turn over a new leaf by posting here on the Agora hub, tries to keep his nose clean, but eventually falls back into the old slant we all know too well. Posters here have issues with you and it seems there is always going to be a score to settle. We both know that what is happening here is nothing in comparison to what we have all seen in past posting at Stockhouse.

Make a reference to our shiny new pamphlet and run it down with your numerous negative observations and then expect that no one will challenge you on it or at the least come in and defend it? I don't think so. You invite the debate, You make very strong statements and I expect that they will be challenged by many. What if ISM or Launchpad takes exception to your public "opinions"

Are they truly purposely deceiving the uninformed? Do they really only have a computer and some drill results? Do we know those are gold ingots and did they not really come from one of our gold prorperties?

I don't think it was our guys who started that shiny brochure topic up, so you invite a contribution from those you make fun of. Remember how funny the whole brochure is? "Deserving of the Leacock Medal" (which gives recognition to the finest in Canadian literary humour)

As for red flags, you said:" By the way, you're inferring some pretty respectable companies are misleading the public in not posting every drill result. Are you just hinting at wrong doing - or would you like to make a more specific charge?"

Now here's what I did say and ask:"would like to ask about one red flag in my mind, I always notice is when a company only chooses to post select drill holes and not all drill holes in news releases. That raises my eyebrows."I simply asked a question as an investor looking at someone's drill results.

To me that is a red flag, red flags can be very subjective and vary with many individuals as stated there is no standard. So to me it jumps out to me as a potential investor that any company that choose to only post drill results for select holes is not telling me the whole story to me personally that is my "red flag" Does that explain my question better. Would you not think of that reporting as a redflag for you? Seems to be a little more important than whether a company who owns gold properties should have or shouldn't have used a picture of some gold ingots. If we are going to talk red flags, my Dad used to tell me, "don't sweat the small stuff"

Red Flag

An indicator of potential problems with a security. Most often used to refer to a stock, a red flag can be any undesirable characteristic that stands out to an analyst. There is no universal standard for identifying red flags; the method used will depend on the investment methodology being employed. A red flag is anything that marks a stock as undesirable. Because there are many different methods used to pick stocks, there are many different types of red flags. What is a red flag for one person might even be considered desirable by another. For example, low institutional ownership might be a positive for someone looking for undiscovered companies, but a negative for a pension fund that searches out blue chips.

By the way, there is an LBE forum who has Agoracom representing their best interests and then there is ISM who does not. I try to stay out of the mud, thats why most of us are here at Agora. Agora tries to offer everyone a nice even headed and balanced hub for all people to throw investor information out for discussion. To help folks make better and educated investment decisions. I want to see it stay balanced and well based in fact. There will always be opinion but it has to follow the limitations of the TOS and the rules of posting. I don't go for namecalling either and will warn anyone by private message.

Last thing, so you are or aren't the president of the LBE hub? It says you are on the LBE hub.

Here's to more civil exchange. Glad it's a weekend.