Guo Wengui / Miles Guo (Ho Wan Kwok): community discussion 007

A participant attacks people tied to Xiao Yang as low quality and claims they tend to disappear when exposed, while saying the setting is open enough that they cannot hide. Community statements, not court findings.

Another participant labels specific figures as loyal followers of Xiao Yang’s circle, reinforcing a faction identity claim. Community statements, not court findings.

One participant states that a person was previously blacklisted by Xiao Yang. Community statements, not court findings.

Another participant claims that anyone blacklisted by Xiao Yang is not an ordinary person. Community statements, not court findings.

A participant argues that the “new federal image” is a major fabrication. Community statements, not court findings.

Another suggests dissenters are being instructed not to speak too much or question authority. Community statements, not court findings.

A participant cautions that outcomes are uncertain and says people should act with conscience rather than self-congratulation. Community statements, not court findings.

Another echoes that only personal conscience should determine right and wrong. Community statements, not court findings.

One participant asserts they avoid speculating without evidence. Community statements, not court findings.

Another challenges that standard by asking for concrete evidence. Community statements, not court findings.

A participant recommends collecting evidence and forwarding notes on suspicious accounts and losses to Guo’s lawyer, not contacting defense counsel directly. Community statements, not court findings.

The paired response is a brief acknowledgment with no additional detail. Community statements, not court findings.

One participant argues a non-directly-related party should include more objective evidence to be persuasive. Community statements, not court findings.

Another says online letters are not seen by the intended person and even paper letters are unlikely to reach him. Community statements, not court findings.

A participant says it is inaccurate to label the entire Himalaya series as engaging in illegal activity and suggests naming only current management. Community statements, not court findings.

The other participant simply agrees. Community statements, not court findings.

One participant warns against issuing demands and instead proposes sending only suggestions with evidence. Community statements, not court findings.

Another says lawyer-related concerns are irrelevant. Community statements, not court findings.

A participant claims creditor registration came from a joke and was followed by organized form-filling by the Farm Alliance to induce people to list as creditors. Community statements, not court findings.

Another participant shares an X status link as supporting context for that procedural argument. Community statements, not court findings.

A participant says a third party lacks standing to challenge a matter involving Wang Yanping because it is unrelated. Community statements, not court findings.

Another argues that a third party may only raise matters connected to their own property security. Community statements, not court findings.

One participant says the main value of writing now is that counsel may later be seen as having done nothing. Community statements, not court findings.

Another follows that their letters can be used as evidence of legal negligence. Community statements, not court findings.