Saturday, May 26, 2007

The Tepe Chronicles...Or The Taming of the Shrew

Imagine, I woke up this morning and found this engaging conversation between Mojo and Rapid Robert and the Village Idiot. And, someone happened to email me a pic of tepe (photo right: tepe). I thought he would be a little heavier. He looks stupid enough though. Well, enjoy. - Morrie33

By: vcsymojo

26 May 2007, 12:34 PM EDT

Msg. 186012 of 186029
Jump to msg. #

Isn't that the pot calling the kettle black? The biggest liar maybe ever in the history of the VCSY boards, let alone the raging bull boards, and he's wondering "WHY SHOULD WE BELIEVE" someone? What a little weasel. The little mental midget, and yes I said little mental midget since he's even more ignorant and insignificant than normal mental midgets, is asking like he's a legitimate, concerned shareholder when he OWNS no shares and is only here to disrupt conversation, to bring up the negatives, to challenge contentions, to lie, distort, discredit. He is a liar, as I said maybe the biggest liar in the history of this board, and he has no credibility. What a sad, pathetic little mental midget.

By: RapidRobert2

26 May 2007, 01:35 PM EDT

Msg. 186026 of 186029
Jump to msg. #

tp: You keep screaming 'the infringement hasn't been proved'...'they have to prove msft infringed'... Where that argument falls apart is the FACT VCSY hired a renowned Intellectual Property law firm, Niro, Scavone, Haller & Niro, that is taking the case on 'contingency' basis which means they feel they can EASILY prove the infringement by microsoft of VCSY technology. This law firm isn't going to take a case that is even questionable since they don't make money if they can't win in court OR GET THE INFRINGER to SIGN A LICENSE AGREEMENT for the infringed technology. From the PR issued by VCSY on 6/6/6...YES! June 6, 2006...666. That might be a signal to msft, too. You want to steal technology, only a devil would try it today with VCSY. "Niro, Scavone, Haller & Niro on a contingency basis to act in connection with the licensing of United States Patent (U.S) No. 6,826,744, the underlying Patent under VCSY’s SiteFlash™ and SiteFlash-derived products" And, if microsoft was comfortable they could put on a defense, they would NOT be talking to the IP law firm about negotiating a license agreement, which they are doing now. PLUS, the lawsuit was filed in MARSHAL, TEXAS...home of the plaintiff friendly court...and NOT a friend of a patent infringer like MSFT. You think this will be the only suit filed...think again. First you go after the biggest infringer with the big pockets, win it or they sign a 'license agreement' and then the other smaller infringers fall into place and also sign on the dotline for the use of the VCSY technology in dotnet. The 'domino' effect, if you will. You can cry all you want but YOU do NOT change the FACTS as presented by Vertical Computer Systems. And, if you want to know and follow the court case, why don't you sign up for the service and read about it...well, I think you have but that eliminates one of your basis for BASHING. YOU LOSE! VCSY WILL either WIN in the court in EAST TEXAS or MSFT WILL SIGN a LICENSE for the VCSY TECHNOLOGY. Easy to see it, too. RR IMO

By: tepe

26 May 2007, 12:58 PM EDT

Msg. 186018 of 186029
(This msg. is a reply to 186017 by RapidRobert2.)
Jump to msg. #

You know Rabidbobby, we've been having a reasonable, positive discussion the past couple of days here until you came along and started your personal attacks again. Why are you so hard to get along with? Is your life always this miserable?

I didn't say that Siteflash wasn't patented. You CLAIMED that VCSY would be getting money for 6 years of infringement. I don't believe the patent was issued until November 2004. SO check your facts before you spew your usual garbage.

FACT is, infringement has NOT been proven so any talk about licensing or lawsuit winnings in pure speculation. Let's wait to see how MSFT answers the suit....and stop your personal attacks. I WILL report all of them.

By: vcsymojo

26 May 2007, 02:26 PM EDT

Msg. 186029 of 186029
Jump to msg. #

Here's a reasonable question. Why did you start bashing the stock the next day after you claimed you bought it? RR or sirius or mmbuster can find those posts. They've posted 'em before. The very next day that you claimed you bought in you started questioning management, chastising management, chastising longs, commenting on how poor a stock VCSY was.

So, what is it? Are you psychotic? A bad investor? Completely stupid?

Normal people don't act like that. They don't bet on the Patriots to win the Super Bowl and call a bomb threat into the team hotel the night before the game at 3 in the morning to wake up the players and give them a poor night's rest. That isn't normal human behavior.

So, you either lied about investing in the company. Or, you're psychotic. A sociopath. A habitual liar. A poor investor. Or one of the most ignorant people alive. If it was my choice, I'd pick a little of all of the above. I know you don't own stock in this company. So, you're a liar. And you do it constantly. Ding. Habitual liar. You're here everyday with your negative attacks. So, you're psychotic. And paranoid. Maybe schizophrnic? By Jove, I think I've nailed it!!!

The teepster is a schizo...!!

Schizophrenic disorders:

"Schizophrenia is characterised by distortions of thinking and perception and is usually accompanied by emotions that are inappropriate or blunted. Typically there is a disturbance of the most basic functions that give a person the feeling of individuality, uniqueness and self-direction. Additionally, the individual may lack insight and may not appreciate that there is anything wrong with his or her mental state."

I think that pretty much sums it up. Tip your waiter. I'll be here all night or until teepster TOS's me

No comments: