Want some cheese with that wine ???

Perhaps you have seem Mr. Samblis’s personal Tumbler blog. He frequently uses this blog to wine and complain about how much of a victim he is, be it from our sites, or life in general. Recently he published an article on anonymity and how bad it is for the internet. An excerpt is quoted below. Many believe Mr. Samblis has used numerous aliases on message boards in an attempt to entice (and many would say, mislead) prospective investors into investing in his company. If true, (and again, many believe strongly this is accurate, and many could point to evidence to support such)… this article would certainly be the height of hypocrisy.

“If you have a real point to make and you use an alias, why should anyone take you seriously.  We don’t know who you are so why should we trust or believe what you write.  We don’t know your hidden agendas, so your words should be considered meaningless.”

While Mr. Samblis makes some good points, his overall concept is completely wrong. He simply ignores the larger point in his opinion piece about anonymity. Yes, at times, anonymity can be abused, but not just on the internet. Anonymity is a well-established option for voicing one’s opinion. While Mr. Samblis questions why should anyone believe a person who voices their opinion anonymously, the answer is, because most who use anonymity can voice their opinions without fear of reprisal. In fact, many believe when one is able to speak anonymously, their TRUE feelings and opinions are voiced. One of an American’s most precious rights is to vote in elections. When you vote, your vote is anonymous. Witnesses in crimes give tips that solve major crimes, anonymously. Criminals supply information to law enforcement, anonymously, that are critical to solving crimes.   Whistle blower identities are protected as well as there are protection for reprisals should their identities become known. Jurors in high profile cases may remain anonymous. The list goes on and on.

Mr. Samblis writes this opinion piece coming from a history of behavior of attacking the messenger when he doesn’t like the message (our previous article illustrates this point). This is a tactic frequently used by those that want to cloud the message, and distract the reader from that message. It stands to reason that Mr. Samblis does not like anonymity because he is unable to attack the messenger and draw the reader’s attention away from the message. Many would argue that people like Mr. Samblis are a primary example of why anonymity is important. It is very unlikely that the volumes of important information investors need when making a buying decision about investing in his company, would be available if it were not for anonymous providers. We have recently witnessed what appears to have been intimidation by Mr. Samblis toward an investor (hhi3) because Mr. Samblis didn’t like the opinions posted to the message board.

Many readers fall prey to this tactic, and frequently it is an effective tactic, and therefore its use is attempted frequently. However, the bottom line is… it doesn’t matter who the messenger is, their background, or even their agenda (hidden or otherwise), if the message is accurate, and supported with independent sources and/or documents, who cares who the messenger is. They could be the worst person on the face of the earth, but if the information is accurate – then the information is accurate, no matter who the messenger is. If for instance, you were the victim of a crime… would it matter to you if one of his criminal buddies turned him in? The informant is a criminal… should he be believed ?  Our guess is, you would welcome the anonymous tip.

This is the point Mr. Samblis misses, or, chooses to ignore. The message about his actions as CEO of his public and private companies are not flattering. Most of the information (very valid information – supported by documentation) has been presented anonymously. Yes, it is agreed that some have used the cover of anonymity to slander him (out of understandable anger at losing vast amounts of money investing in his company), however, the amount of information available about Mr. Samblis is vast, and an overwhelming amount of such is well supported by documents and independent verification – much of which was provided by anonymous sources. Just because the source chooses to remain anonymous, doesn’t reduce the validity of such information. The information provided should be able to stand on its own merits, regardless of the vehicle (person) used to present such.

It seems apparent Mr. Samblis makes every effort to shoot the messenger whenever possible. Mr. Samblis has likely spent enormous sums of investor funds attempting to stifle Larry and his Friends websites. This action is well documented in the public record.  He has attempted numerous times to stifle Larry’s free speech rights, all the while exercising his free speech rights to attack Larry.  Apparently Mr. Samblis believes only HE can exercise the use of free speech rights. Had he been successful, he would have removed YOUR right to this valuable and useful information. Ask yourself… do you want the Mr. Samblis’s of the world deciding what you can and cannot read ?

We have said many times previously that Mr. Samblis should spend any investor funds wisely, and use such in an effort to generate revenue for his investors. Not chase Larry, or attack other investors, and in turn waste the hard earned dollars of investors that invested in his company. Generating revenue would dispel much of the negative information about Mr. Samblis. As we indicated in yesterday’s post, Mr. Samblis is quite the prolific writer, yet we are unaware of ANY instance where Mr. Samblis has addressed the very serious issues raised by investors.   Instead Mr. Samblis chooses to shoot the messenger, just as he has attempted to do in his recent article, from which the above quote was taken.

Mr. Samblis… your road to recovery will commence the day you lay aside your voracious appetite for destroying those that voice their opposition to your failed efforts, and the day you come to the realization that no one is to blame but yourself for your downfall. Accept some personal responsibility, and maybe, just maybe, you will begin to rebuild some of the respect you think you should be afforded. Respect is not free, it needs to be earned.

Here’s the problem…

So… according to the hhi3 post over on Investors Hub, Mr. Samblis called this one-time loyal and apparently significant investor… and as a result of that call, the poster states he has ceased posting his opinions about IMTV and Mr. Steven Samblis.  MilesBlue42, in a later post, rightfully asks the question… was this call of a threatening nature.  Common sense would conclude it must have been.  Here’s the facts… the investor was a supporter, then due to the actions of the CEO, Mr. Steven Samblis (i.e. reverse split after reverse split, and PPS dropping to point zero zero zero worthless), the investor apparently became disillusioned and had been voicing his opinion about the loss of his investment as a result of the bad decisions of the CEO.  Not unlike many many others.

This situation begs the question… what kind of CEO calls an investor at his home and, apparently, threatens him into ceasing to voice his opinion?  This situation appears to be the height of hypocrisy.  Mr. Samblis appears to like the idea of free speech when it applies to HIS free speech, as he has been fond of calling Larry (and others) just about every name in the book.  However, according to the hhi3 post, Mr. Samblis “doesn’t like to be called names“.  Many would say… when Mr. Samblis is responsible for the loss of their hard earned investment… he earned it.

hhi3, like Friends, and many others, were avid supporters of Mr. Samblis and his efforts… but things changed.  Investors believed bad and irresponsible decisions were made by Mr. Samblis that caused the company to crumble (and along with it, their investment), and, they began to voice their opinions about such.   As we have illustrated within this blog numerous times before, Mr. Samblis will attack the messenger when he doesn’t like the message.  Many use this tactic to distract from addressing the message.  Readers have seen the time and energy Mr. Samblis has devoted to attacking Larry and the Friends websites.  So much time devoted to attacking the messenger, and nothing devoted to addressing the message.

This shooting the messenger tactic, we believe, is part of Mr. Samblis’s personality.  For many of these types, the urge is instinctive, and uncontrollable.  We believe, the arrogance, and urge to be liked, is so strong in these types that they can not accept the reality that they are responsible for their own actions, hence these types frequently place blame on others for their situation.  It is inconceivable to them that they could ever be responsible for their situation, so it must be the actions of those that would speak ill of them and therefore they must be destroyed.  Readers have seen the lengths Mr. Samblis has gone to in his effort to shoot the messenger for voicing their opinion of him.

So… readers knowing the lengths Mr. Samblis will go to in order to silence his critics, it appears to be a reasonable conclusion, based on Mr. Samblis’s well documented history, that the call to hhi3 was threatening.

Apparently, according to Mr. Samblis, free speech is only a one-way street, and he has the right-of-way.

Folks, as always, read the information that is easily obtained with a simple Google search, and decide for yourself if the message is valid.  Also, read what Mr. Samblis writes (he is quite the prolific writer), and see how much time he devotes to addressing the message, and how much time he devotes to attacking anyone that would dare to post accurate and factual information which is unfavorable to him and his efforts.  See if he devotes any time whatsoever to accepting responsibility for his actions as CEO for the company’s downfall.  You may just discover that the vast majority of the negative information available about Mr. Samblis is accurate, and well supported by independent sources.    Look back through this blog… you will see that we were avid supporters also, at one time.  We have not removed any of the very favorable early posts.  You can follow the transition from supporter to realist, and we supply documentation and independent sources to support our  conclusions and opinions.  To borrow a well used phrase… we report – you decide!

And BTW… what’s with the IC Places website?  Looks like it’s been abandoned.