Hoov comes on and posts facts as he reads them. He invites others to question those facts. Glorieux does, and hoov responds. Out of that, hoov is an arrogant poster who only bashes. But Fluffy, who virtually never posts facts, talks in the third person (what's up with that?), and heaps praise on himself for his cleverness, is a fine poster. Very equitable board moderation indeed.

Except for the few here who are truly useless posters, I think most people would welcome the contrary posts. And they would especially welcome the intelligent rebuttal that would increase confidence in their investment.

The last 2 or 3 posts hoov made were kind of deflating to the optimism of the original reports they referenced. So why doesn't one of the ZEN experts shoot hoov's post full of holes? Demonstrate why what he posted should be disregarded. That's the way to defeat "bashers", not by trying to keep them from posting.