As someone who has watched Vortex since last February, I agree with your assessment that many on Vortex have raised valid objections to many of Rossi's demos and his business strategy. I would certainly not characterize the vortex as a Rossi investor clubhouse, far from it. And of course because most of you have shown reasonable skepticism concerning various issues, the posts which caused the bannings were very irratating, even to an outsider like me. Notwithstanding, some of MY's points are valid, not conclusive but valid. The problem with MY, once a point is made we get it, people don't need someone clubing them over the head ad naseaum.
Ransom Sent from my iPhone On Jan 31, 2012, at 8:25 PM, zer tte <c_foreig...@yahoo.com> wrote: > Randy, i respect your wish to see george response published here, however > unlike the vortex, george is not banned from the internet as far as i know. > So i don't really see the point for him to request that you become his voice, > unless being a lawyer makes you the perfect target for a proxy to talk > through maybe ? > Still there is one thing i kind of disagree with in your statement about the > "MY does make valid points" part, those points where already known and > established by jed, david, daniel, horace, bob and many others and i hope > this is clear because it seems to be often forgotten in the flood. > > I don't know why but it seems to me some people felt like the vortex became > Rossi's investors clubhouse, or DGT etc ... i believe this is not.
