Better be careful, Gary. When you start trying to reason and give solid examples to Cuban, you tread on dangerous land. It's all about his gut, not anyone else's.
To wit: "... "our obligation is not to the reader, it is to the trading activities of our owners."
Reminds me of his Benefactor TV show fiasco. He tried to parlay it as a show about a bunch of people who would do anything to get a million bucks. It was really just ALL about
Cuban manipulating people behind the scenes. Tweaking their chains for his own jollies. VERY weird.
He tried to say it was a big step beyond Trump's show, even though Trump mostly stayed in the backgound in his and let the people do the tweaking amongst each other.
Cuban's show flamed out after only six episodes. ABC said "your fired!"
His ShareSleuth will ultimatley do the same, because no RESPECTABLE journo will want to be associated with him.
And Cuban can't stand that.
Gary calm down. You are right but you put too much emphasis on Marc's veneal sins because you're a journo. I'm the same way with my own field.
Marc is going to have to learn his own way.
It's going to be Chris Carey who notices the problem because, if his first story is any example, he's going to be writing great stories, and people are going to use his connection to Marc to discount him. Don't argue with Marc. Argue with Chris.
I don't expect Cuban to learn a thing, John, from me or anyone. He's shown a total obtuseness to the implications of prepublication trading. As for Chris, I certainly have no problem or argument with him, as he is not the one violating basic journalistic precepts. Cuban is.
C'mon. Carey is complicit. Would you feel right about taking such a job?
That's jumping to conclusions, to say the least. Chris is a reputable journalist who has, I am sure, absolutely no control over Mark Cuban's actions. I tend to doubt that even Mark Cuban has any control over Mark Cuban's actions.
Now now Gary there must be some limits
and this sentence from your previous blog,'I read through his rambling, disjointed Patrick-Byrne-style rant a few times and still can't comprehend his point',was indeed a low blow,hee hee.
I don't even know why I'm laughing, that's as bad as any of my tirades against the truly bad guys.Also I will at least always respect Cuban for being the first besides my own
rants perhaps to really criticise what you have come to call the 'baloney brigade'.
This is very paradoxical for me because I really respect you both as different as you are for persuing this organized penny stock scam that Chris Cox,John Reed Stark,Paul Atkins
and their SEC are determined to protect and cover up for WHATEVER REASONS OF THEIR OWN.
You guys have really gone after each others jugulars which I don't like cause you have both contributed to exposing this penny stock fraud in your different ways and as a defrauded victim of James Dale Davidson,Agora Inc.,Stanford University, Endovasc,Bellador Group et.al.,I owe you both a debt of gratitude even though neither of you so far have gotten to the bottom of this particular penny stock fraud in my opinion.Still you have both tackled and criticised it for the fraud it is.
Perhaps if you go back to blogmaverick
and Cuban's blogs immediately following the NCANS February 8,2005$100,000 + Washington Post letter to W Bush et.al.,warning Bush of the supposed 'dangers of naked short selling' to all stocks and stock markets and how Mark Cuban with no economic incentive whatsoever for taking the issue own to my knowledge did so quite eloquently.
Stop guys I respect you both too much for this not to hurt a bit.Surely both of you must know more worthy targets for your criticisms than each other.Although on the other hand maybe you are both performing a public service for even having this debate in public and are really conspiring together in hopes of making your audience think and percieve the paradox we all swim in.
But he knew about the "business model" going in, no?
Commenting by HaloScan
