No, that is false, Bob. Please let us be accurate. This is what I posted:
Message 15850736
Posts of mine here at SI have been edited, by the administration of this site. Posts in October had their
links removed. I have e-mail correspondence from SI Bob (Admin) confirming this.
I never accused you of personally editing my posts. I have no way of knowing who edited them at this stage, though I expect down the road it will certainly be brought out into the open.
Whether or not you believe Hotlists are manipulated is your choice, of course. I have posted some very strange coincidences which SI has yet to address. They raise grave concerns in my mind. SI silence on these matters is disturbing.
What I will say to you is the following: you suspended me last Fall 3 times for the following, and I quote a PM you sent me:
Monday, October 9, 2000 9:59 AM ET
To: CountofMoneyCristo
From: SI Admin (Bob)
I have reviewed your posts over the last several days in the Market Gems and INTC threads.
Almost all of them have been destructive, disruptive, off-topic, or all of the above.
If you're going to post on those threads, please stick with the topics.
And to clarify our stance on advertising, it's basically this:
1. In profiles, anything goes. Banners or anything you want.
2. In thread headers, links are fine.
3. In messages, all that's acceptable is either linking to a page at one's site that pertains to the post and therefore the subject (ie. an INTC graph in the INTC thread), or the URL of your site's homepage as a sign-off. Messages can never be used for advertising. If it appears the text of a message serves no purpose but to advertise another site, it is considered a volation of the Terms of Use.
Regards,
SI Admin (Bob)
Now I was suspended three times - once for an entire month -because I posted links to my site at the bottom of my posts, below my name. Those links, which under your very own guidelines, as identifying links below my name you yourself stated were fine under SI Codes, were removed, without my permission. Whoever did it, that is a fact. You accused me of multiple posting and used that as your excuse to suspend me. However, it is interesting that my multiple posts were in response to a veritable barrage of posts made by Ms. Simon, which were outrageous personal attacks, all of them, for which she was not sanctioned at any time. Furthermore, if anyone at SI has ever abused their membership privileges in order to advertise a busness to extremity, it would be Ms. Barbara Simon. Now if SI is going to shield these individuals from censure in this manner, then they align themselves with these interests. I have been informed by counsel that what that would mean is that SI and its parent, Infospace, Inc., could be held liable for damages, if any, accruing from activities of those who were given preferential treatment at this site. That is a quite serious matter. I would draw your attention to the following messages you sent me:
Tuesday, October 17, 2000 10:41 AM ET
To: CountofMoneyCristo (who wrote)
From: SI Admin (Bob)
Why did you just post another identical copy to the Market Gems thread?
What part of "I did not delete it" confused you?
Tuesday, October 17, 2000 11:16 AM ET
To: CountofMoneyCristo (who wrote)
From: SI Admin (Bob)
The system apparently went ahead and deleted it much later, despite my having told it to cancel the deletion well before it had taken place.
You apparently posted it again at 3:56AM.
Tuesday, October 17, 2000 12:00 PM ET
To: CountofMoneyCristo (who wrote)
From: SI Admin (Bob)
There is nothing that can be done about the time of the remaining post, and it's not possible to "undelete" the previous post.
If you didn't want it posted in the middle of the night, then you probably shouldn't have posted it then.
That's all there is to it. Nothing will be changed.
Regards,
SI Admin (Bob)
Now we are going over this again, which I had sought to avoid. A post of mine was deleted from SI. I attempted several times to repost it and those were all likewise deleted. I demanded that it be restored at the time I posted it, round about 7pm. Bob refused, as you can see. The only copy he permitted to remain was one I finally could post in the middle of the night. When I speak of censorship, this is what I intend to get across. Bob, in deleting my post, which at first you quite dramatically denied, i.e., when you said,
What part of "I did not delete it" confused you?
and deleting all other copies except for one made much later, <b>the truth and accuracy of the context of my post, quite a great deal of its integrity, was destroyed. I find that absolutely and completely unacceptable, and I did let my felings be known on this paricular issue some time ago. It is time these practices stopped.
Now I have heard report of your stand at iHub. If I have been given an accurate rendition then I would applaud you for that. I am also willing to extend to you somewhat the benefit of the doubt concerning your actions towards me this Fall, and that is no simple matter, considering what occurred. However, there are certain events and actions that linger, and fit the pattern of what I have seen thus far here to date. If it comes out in the future that you in fact were responsible for editing my posts, in addition to what we already known, that you deleted a great many of them, then my stance and that of counsel will be changing dramatically. I am sorry, but I have not been involved in squelching fair commentary at SI. We are going to get to the bottom of who is, and what their motivation has been. There are some pretty convincing indicatons already that we know who many of the directors are.
Now if you are going to quote what I say, please do it accurately. Thank-you.
Regards,
Olivier L. F. Asser |
