Yeah, we do appreciate you. Where I suggest you are going wrong is by inserting yourself as an authority. Proclamations such as “this guy is a risk” and he is “an sst rebrand” are pure conjecture. This is only a quick example . You go on and on in sources threads with conjecture that is nothing more than a bi-product of your own bias. My bias is slow TA. I fucking despise it but you’ll only catch 1 or 2 of my comments in a “the provider” thread (on various boards). I’m not going to go looking for trouble where it doesn’t exist or shame those that use him.
Being informative and being responsible in the process is a fine balance. Turn on CNN and you’ll see an organization that has fucked up that balance royally. I said earlier in this thread that at some point it is counterproductive. I don’t believe newbs would bother reading 100 pages of text. They are likely to see a few negative posts , largely based on personal bias, close the thread and buy elsewhere. Elsewhere like Facebook where the IA super pharma group is alive and well with good to go’s and every 10’th vial comes with a free infection. And all the while they could have got good testosterone here , you know , like the one that was tested.