[smcicr]

Yawn.

As has been said before:

Let's have something concrete and tangible from the rodent to explain:

- why Phorm is legal,
- why the notable individuals and organisations are wrong,
- where the legal advice provided to people like Phorm and BT came from and why it isn't being proffered every chance they get to kill this point stone dead

without even starting on:

- why we should trust Phorm at all in the absence of the above (company history, omission of info to HO, secret BT trials, spin of info from HO, hosting shenanigans etc etc)
- why has the BT trial been delayed since March
- why have VM (to an extent) and the Guardian (totally) distanced themselves from the product
- why did CPW feel it necessary to change the way they are looking to implement the system
- why the share price has gone tank tank tankety tank over the last few months

and on it goes....

I mean really - let's have it - I think everyone on here would love the chance to debate the issues with a pro-phormer. As (again) has been said before - the lack of such debate suggests that there is no interest in doing so because there are no good answers. No-one wants to turn up to a debate if they know in advance they are just going to be made to look entirely foolish, do they?