Georgia Bard's Corner Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Georgia Bard's Corner

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: bob sims who wrote ()	7/3/1999 9:22:00 AM
From: Ga Bard	Read Replies (1) of 9440

hmmm ... Bob ... SI is one of the only threads that you have to identify yourself and cannot hide under a shroud. SI can and will identify you. SO that in itself is better than any other site where bashers, touters, promoters, scam artist can hide under a secret internet shroud. SI has to operate in accordance with the constitution. The constitution allows for freedom of speech and encourages verbal warfare. Should SI jump into the middle of issues thus making themselves the judge and jury of the constitution? SHould they be the main legal presence on our right to public express our concerns both positive and negative? Would that not open SI up to lawsuits? Personal attacks are always used by emotional folks. If people deal with a naysayer with facts then personal attacks do not come into play. However, most of the time first blood is draw by anyone but the naysayer. Poor naysayers are the witch-hunters where Janice and her so called group typically make valid points. Are they shorters I dunno ... How do they trade ... I dunno ... are they compensated... I doubt it because by now everyone knows about disclosure. I do not think they would still be posting if they were compensated after the first lawsuit. I doubt they would still be targeting certain stocks for whatever agenda they have. What I do know is if you read their posts you do in fact find a valid point of concern. There is not one single stock I know of that can not be naysayed. Is it SI's job to step into the middle of a situation? If you remember last year, I had a group accusing and innuendoing me of everything and the ring leader a bowling alley queen. You should remember this very well and the massive growth at one time by use of the secret PMs and emails of the internet. I was convicted without a trial. I was convict on convient logic. I was convicted by a BOWLING ALLEY QUEEN's emotional witch-hunting!!! If that did not teach the people of SI that anyone with a computer and a poor me scenario can not innuendo you to death I do not know what does. Heck at least Janice has Business wire and companies slamming and suing or going to sue her and not some ridiculous emotional hyperster turned witch-hunter. SI did not stop the bowling alley queen and her group because they were entitiled to do the libel and the have the right to express it publicly. That is within our freedom of speech right. Now can I sue SI ... no ... but I can make suit against the libel and the slander. Trust me I would have like to have sue SI for allowing the wrongful assassination of my character all because I caught a CEO about to nail investors. Not to mention the mental stress I went through. (However pay back is heck) Is it over ... no ... it is not and far from it. I need to be able to get up enough money before the statue of limitation comes into affect. The letters are written and posts accumulated. Now everyone knows of my misfortune, losses and the infamous internet character assassination. What is funny is there are those that on any occassion should I nay a stock ... IMMEDIATELY ... start with the personal attacks. I wonder if like me if Janice will consider suing all those posters that have falsely accused her ... what if she is just voicing her concern about a stock that escalated on a obvious run up? Is SI only for the positive and not for the negatives? Does not the constitution allow for debate and differences of opinion? I do not see where SI is to blame nor Janice. As for myself since I have followed her so called naysay, I have to admit she is very deliberate in her analysis of information available to her. I have been in some stocks she has nayed and her posts I found to be accurate and have a valid underlying basis. If 60 Minutes comes to your door then you are going to have a very bad day. Well if Janice comes to your stock you are going to have a very bad day. They both are deliberate. Remember you once told me that the best defense was the truth. You have to ask yourself: What if they have done nothing wrong and merely expressing a view, which they get personally attacked thus they dig deeper to defend their opinions and personal attacks? Would your post be considered libel with an underlying basis of emotional stress thus causing you to write such posts? Just asking Bob because you were here when I was going through it myself as a innuendoed shorter, paid shill, P & D, etc. etc. etc. :-) GB

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next