Adrian and Lennart— I wonder who after Che will be the first to defend their former anti-Rossi “claque”?
Bob Cook From: Adrian Ashfield<mailto:a.ashfi...@verizon.net> Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2017 5:28 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Why Rossi 'won' I agree Lennart. Vortex is not the worst offender. lenrforum.com is worse. People there write hundreds of pages of insulting, unproven waffle/speculation. Apart from Jed most are anonymous armchair critics who do nothing themselves but apparently can't stand the thought of someone actually doing what they can only dream about. Many are so arrogant they are certain they have all he answers when they don't. -----Original Message----- From: Lennart Thornros <lenn...@thornros.com> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> Sent: Thu, Jul 27, 2017 7:22 am Subject: RE: [Vo]:Why Rossi 'won' I agree with Bob. It has been a lot of name calling here on Vortex during the last year. Especially AR has been given very demeaing epithets. I still don't know how well his invention works. I know he is a true entrepreneur. He believes in his ideas. One overwhelming proof is that he settled for just freedom from poor bed fellows to persuade the ideas. He could have retired before filing and had enough for the rest of his life. Che could learn about benefits in free society isn't always driven by Money. Jed could learn that things get done without government is involved and that unortodox methods can be used. I hope his invention has a great value. Lennart On Jul 26, 2017 21:22, "bobcook39...@hotmail.com<mailto:bobcook39...@hotmail.com>" <bobcook39...@hotmail.com<mailto:bobcook39...@hotmail.com>> wrote: The folks on Vortex-l that in the past have suggested Rossi was a fraud etc must be busy eating crow based on the significant silence of their anti-Rossi claque. Bob Cook From: Che<mailto:comandantegri...@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, July 21, 2017 7:58 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com> Subject: [Vo]:Why Rossi 'won' This has likely already been pointed out here -- but I'll point it out now (again), if it hasn't. Here’s The Settlement—Getting The License Back Was Rossi’s Top Priority<https://animpossibleinvention.com/2017/07/18/heres-the-settlement-getting-the-license-back-was-rossis-top-priority/> The bottom line appears to be that IH 'settled' -- because they simply could not *prove* fraud (which perhaps, never actually took place -- at least the way IH sees it). Simple as that. So they would have _lost_ the case if it had gone to trial -- and been liable for whatever _they_ would have been liable for. Rossi OTOH, strategically forewent the money he was 'owed': because he valued the IP over everything else -- and is smart enuff to know when to 'fold' and walk away. Is that it, or close enuff..?
