There was a time when Mr. Pink would send out witty activist letters full of zing and sarcasm, which would brighten many a trader's day. Then Mr. Pink started running a multi-billion fund and Mr. Pink matured into Dan Loeb. Today, Loeb returns with a vengeance having submitted a zinger letter to YHOO CEO Scott Thompson, in his capacity as a 5.8% shareholder of YHOO stock. Needless to say, Loeb is less than pleased with Yahoo's recent snub of his board of director candidates. The result are sentences such as the following: "Only in an illogical Alice-in-Wonderland world would a shareholder be deemed to be conflicted from representing the interests of other shareholders because he is, well, a shareholder too."..."this “long-term vs. short-term” excuse is a canard and particularly inapt in the case of Yahoo!. If there ever was a company in need of a sense of urgency, it is this one."..." Was it “short-term” thinking that led Third Point to push for the resignations of Jerry Yang, Roy Bostock, Arthur Kern and Vyomesh Joshi? If so, is there a Yahoo! shareholder on the planet who thinks this “short-term” thinking was bad for the Company? Was it “short-term” thinking that led Third Point to speak up for shareholders by questioning the fairness of the attempt by the Company to give away control to private equity funds – without receiving a premium – to entrench Roy Bostock and Jerry Yang? Or to suggest, as Third Point has, that the Company’s stake in Alibaba is more valuable than generally understood, and that the Company should hold on to it unless it can get fair value? Was it “short-term” thinking to point out the lack of media and advertising expertise on the Board and nominate extraordinarily qualified nominees to fill that gaping hole?" And so on. Loeb concludes amicably: "We remain willing to engage further with you but will not deviate from our demand for badly-needed shareholder representation." We are confident his next letter, which will be released in 1-2 months, will hardly be so pleasant.