now that I have a minute to reply, your question to me is: "Your confidence level in the "next steps" suggests you have a more complete visual of the court proceedings. How close are you?"
Am not quite sure what you mean by "more complete visual," but I'm no closer to court proceedings than any other given follower of this saga. I read what I can and try to save what's interesting... does that answer it? If not, please elaborate...
Also, you mention my "negative comments" ... not sure what you mean by that, either. Again, please elaborate...
BTW, I, too, have concerns about market integrity, fwiw...
(Now, then... a parting shot at 10 of No-Word-Count: I didn't check Wally's post, but inspired by TaxBack's inventory of his post in Word, I ran mine and his in "word count": TB's reply weighs in at 685 words, 3,579 characters including spaces; by comparison, mine is a lean-mean 367 words, 1,991 characters including spaces... )
quote:Originally posted by thesource: Ok , here's my take on it ..... I know you guys can't wait to hear from the know it all .
Pg 2 of 4 states that Rufus has not received any ill gotten gains and wants the default set aside . This is fine for himself personally but he's trying to tie himself in with the company and then seperate himself at the same time .
If the motion is granted , he got away without having to hire an attorney for the company because he's asking for the whole thing to be set aside not just his part . He's trying to paint the SEC responsible for the current situation .
This is not going to work , in my opinion . The SEC will move to strike this down because he's attempting to file this for the company and himself (notice the defendants listed). If he were to write up a motion with just his name listed and only asked for himself to be set aside out of default thats different . The company would still be in the crapper and he'd still have other issues on his hands but might skate from this issue but thats a huge might .
Nice try Rufus but its not going to fly ......
is Rufus flat broke? LOL
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Is there anything to the idea that since the company CEO changed several times after the default Rufus is not liable for the company's answer as it wouls of or should of been takeb care of the acting CEO in the months after Rufus's original departure?
Can Rufus say I'm answering for myself but I wasn't the CEO and the SEC will have to refile the complaints to specifically name the current CEO as the defendant?
A: Probably close to it . I believe that the house he lives in and the ranch where his horses are do not belong to him .
Q:Can Rufus say I'm answering for myself but I wasn't the CEO and the SEC will have to refile the complaints to specifically name the current CEO as the defendant?
A: He can answer to the suit filed against him but if doing so must not include mention of the company or ask for anything to be set a side for the company . Remember , he can file anything he'd like at this point but the Judge still has to approve it and the SEC will more than likely strike it down depending on how its worded . Either way , all that can be done at this point for Rufus is to set aside the default against him and carry on with the suit against him . What makes anyone here think Rufus stands a fighting chance in court representing himself when he's having a hell of a time getting filings submitted and accepted to begin with ?
-------------------- ----- Game Over ----- Posts: 1536 | From: San Antonio - Texas | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dollar, what does DP post as over there? I'm trying to find his comments, but there's too much to wade through.
Posts: 1028 | From: Georgia | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by thesource: Q: Is Rufus flat broke ?
A: Probably close to it . I believe that the house he lives in and the ranch where his horses are do not belong to him .
Q:Can Rufus say I'm answering for myself but I wasn't the CEO and the SEC will have to refile the complaints to specifically name the current CEO as the defendant?
A: He can answer to the suit filed against him but if doing so must not include mention of the company or ask for anything to be set a side for the company . Remember , he can file anything he'd like at this point but the Judge still has to approve it and the SEC will more than likely strike it down depending on how its worded . Either way , all that can be done at this point for Rufus is to set aside the default against him and carry on with the suit against him . What makes anyone here think Rufus stands a fighting chance in court representing himself when he's having a hell of a time getting filings submitted and accepted to begin with ?
You are correct, he doesnt own the ranch he leases it as far as I know...and im sure its not cheap. Raising horses is no drop in the bucket either...especially the "grade" of horses he deals with.
Do i think he is broke? Nope....i seriously think not.
Posts: 2308 | From: Michigan | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by thesource: What makes anyone here think Rufus stands a fighting chance in court representing himself when he's having a hell of a time getting filings submitted and accepted to begin with ?[/b]
Because we got 5 billion dollars!!!
Posts: 869 | From: Az | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by thesource: What makes anyone here think Rufus stands a fighting chance in court representing himself when he's having a hell of a time getting filings submitted and accepted to begin with ?[/b]
Because we got 5 billion dollars!!!
Then maybe Rufus should get an attorney and stop dicking around . I know if I was in his shoes and had 5 billion dollars , I'd hire the best legal counsel I could find . I'd slap the SEC around and after I was done , I'd file a counter suit against them for damages done against the company and for cost of legal counsel .
But thats if I had 5 billion dollars ........
-------------------- ----- Game Over ----- Posts: 1536 | From: San Antonio - Texas | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hi Guys....I am on my daughter's computer because for some reason mine isn't working...so I can't go onto Rufus' site because it is linked to my laptops IP address....
I see there has been some happenings.....
-------------------- ..just remember....Family is EVERYTHING!! Posts: 3944 | From: Rochester, NY | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Jenna: Hi Guys....I am on my daughter's computer because for some reason mine isn't working...so I can't go onto Rufus' site because it is linked to my laptops IP address....
I see there has been some happenings.....
If you're on the same network then your daughters computer and your laptop will have the same IP address.
Posts: 854 | From: Alpharetta, GA | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by thesource: What makes anyone here think Rufus stands a fighting chance in court representing himself when he's having a hell of a time getting filings submitted and accepted to begin with ?[/b]
Because we got 5 billion dollars!!!
Then maybe Rufus should get an attorney and stop dicking around . I know if I was in his shoes and had 5 billion dollars , I'd hire the best legal counsel I could find . I'd slap the SEC around and after I was done , I'd file a counter suit against them for damages done against the company and for cost of legal counsel .
But thats if I had 5 billion dollars ........
exactly!! IF! BIG IF, this company actualy had 5 BILLION dollars in REAL assets they absolutey positively WOULD have hired the best buisness law firm in the country to fix this mess!! IF they had this money, five BILLION dollars!!!! think about it! the interest on that money for one week could pay THE BEST LEAGLE TEAM IN THE COUNTRY to represent them. yet they have NO LAWYER!!! witch leads me to belive it`s all SCAM BS!!!! JMHO!!!
Posts: 2503 | From: connecticut | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
We are not only rich but GOLDEN !!! I think I can see the smoke from Washington being on fire all the way from south Texas . Damn that must be one hell of a fire .........
-------------------- ----- Game Over ----- Posts: 1536 | From: San Antonio - Texas | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by PCola77: too two to your you're should of instead of should've (would of, could of, etc)
By the way, on your earlier post, you could have left out the word "computer"...
quote:Originally posted by Jenna: Here are a few spelling errors that REALLY annoy me...(feel free to add any)
Legal (not Leagle)
Prove (not proove)
Lose (not Loose)
*just thought I would bring these up- sorry for sounding like a bi*ch)*
Sorry PC but should've (etc) is short for 'should have' so no misspelling there. From what I see there is plenty of leeway given around the message boards in the area of spelling. In some instances way too much.
Note: your other references depend on usage also.
IMO Mo
-------------------- Hi-ho Momo, awayyyy... Posts: 871 | From: So. Cal | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
When people type "could of" what they mean is "could've", a contraction for could have. It sounds the same, which is why people write/type it wrong, but no, in no case is "could of" not bad english.
What you meant to type, was "he should have had", or should've, not should of.
of is a useful word, yes, but it's still a preposition, not a verb. You can't "of".
And yes, the other ones depend on usage, and people butcher them constantly.
E.G., Your a basher! There are to many bashers on this thread.
quote:Originally posted by mo-rydr:
quote:Originally posted by T e x: lol...
"should ofinstead of should've ..."
Yes but 'should of' is not always bad English, depends on the usage. (Look up 'of', it has a wide range of usage) Example: He should of had...
posted
See, I can deal with "woulda coulda shoulda", because it's obviously shorthand/slang, while "should of" is just ignorance. Posts: 5508 | From: Southeastern PA | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
Topic Closed
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
