It's not at question of liking - did you never asked if those things are complete or contain all relevant things?
Well, you're using "valid" is certain odd way (possibly a language issue?). But, a valid uncertainty? It doesn't make much sense in this context.
Why? The fourth was about one specific question, the second included others that I arised in that thread.
Second: There are unanswered questions.
Fourth: Queried and no response (ie. an unanswered question).
Yes? From Germany. Or what else will you mandate? The same game that w-e-v wanted to play at the beginning? Not again.
Yes, sure. But, I'm not sure what Germany has to do with it.. or w-e-v. In any event, you're clearly siding with AV-C and always have been. It doesn't seem to have occurred to you that your Valid list has been written in certain, very telling, way. Allow me to modify it for you to demonstrate what I mean (still using Valid, which should possibly be "fact")..
- Valid AV-C hasn't contradicted Comodo's evidence. Suspicious/odd. Issue of trust.
- Valid is that many questions are unanswered. [this doesn't need modification]
- Valid is that the fact that AV-C gags vendors is nothing new.
- Valid is no evidence has been presented by AV-C to demonstrate their independence.